500 words a day on whatever I want

How White America got rich

How did White America become so rich? Those hard-working, pull-themselves-up-by-their-bootstraps White Americans experienced at least three windfalls in their history:

Land: The largest piece of virgin farm land in the world as of 1500, more farm land than in all of China! White Americans took it from Native Americans at low cost.

Labour: at cut rates from people of colour: slaves, coolies, migrant workers, Mexican nannies and landscapers, etc. Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account.

Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans (see #2).

And that is not all. I am sure readers can think of a few more.

So White Americans who think it was all just a matter of hard work and the right values are missing the bigger picture.

And even the narrower picture: As much as White Americans like to narrow history to just their own family (“My family never owned slaves”, “My grandfather came to America with $25 in his pocket”), they are forgetting even that little bit of history: if hard work and the right values were enough, then why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot.

There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls. What about them? Some of them had empires of their own. Even Belgium once ruled the Congo. As for the others, like Norway or Switzerland, it is hard to believe they would have got so rich without America and all the wealth that poured into Europe from the white empires.

Given that white people ruled most of the world in 1900 and are now so rich it is profoundly dishonest to believe:

It was just a matter of brains, hard work and clean living.

It was because white people are just a cut above people of colour, like it or not.

White Americans like to believe that stuff because:

It appeals to their white pride (which they deny they have);

It fits their racist picture of the world (which they think is just seeing the world as it is);

It covers over their dirty, ugly history of how they got so rich.

If whites are just naturally better than others then they would have been rich and powerful all throughout history, or at least most of it, not just during chance bits of it – like now and in the time of Rome (which also got rich by robbing and ruling other lands).

And if it is just a matter brains, hard work and clean living, then why all the slaves and dead natives?

But what about White privilege? Some Whites would argue that their ancestors came over here with pennies in their pockets and just the clothing on their back, but were able to do well and live the American dream.

I believe that White privilege, combined with anti-Black racism, explains why so many dirt poor Europeans were able to come here with next-to-nothing, but do well in a few decades.

White privilege means that for generations Whites got the best jobs, were allowed to live in the best communities, hold political office, etc., while Blacks were prohibited BY LAW from doing the same in much of early American history. This happened even in the so called free North.

To this day, there are some Black families who just now have one member graduating from institutions of higher education, or owning a home, etc.

There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls. What about them? Some of them had empires of their own. Even Belgium once ruled the Congo. As for the others, like Canada or Switzerland, it is hard to believe they would have got so rich without America and all the wealth that poured into Europe from the white empires.

I’m really confused as to why you believe Canada is as well off as America, but somehow has a cleaner past. Like America, Canada robbed the First Nations of their land, committed genocidal acts against the First Nations (50% of Native Children sent to residential schools died…and it was mandatory by law that they be sent) and still to this day does not respect or provide the same basic fundamental human rights to the First Nations people (despite what you may have been led to believe from the bit of propaganda which was the Olympic opening ceremonies):

Many of the first Blacks in Nova Scotia were brought to this country via Jamaica to be slaves. Even when I was in high school, we did learn that there was African slaves in Quebec, but because of the climate many of them died so they enslaved the First Nations to do their labour instead.

As for the third windfall being money made from war, I can’t really speak to, because I don’t really have a clue. But certainly the vast amounts of natural resources Canada has, has made it a very rich country (our water is piped to the US to water your golf courses…)

Right, there is white privilege too. The post is not meant to list everything. For example, the advantages the come from American world power were left out. That is why I wrote, “And that is not all. I am sure readers can think of a few more.”

Thank you. So often white Canadians like to forget about its role as a colonial power and pretend that we as a country are perfect. Even our current Prime Minister has been quoted as having this belief that somehow we as a country have no blood on our hands.

The acts of genocide Canada has in its past, and the environmental racism past and present it continues to perpetrate needs to not be ignored.

If White Americans read what I write – and clearly some do – that is great. At least they have heard what I have to say even if they utterly disagree. Maybe it will make more sense to them down the road. But in the main I do not write for them:

abagond, you really really need a course in economics and another course in history.

As for Norway, it is a small country — I think the population is around 9 million, only a little larger than the population of NY City — with a homogeneous population.

Why is Norway a prosperous nation? One word: OIL.

Norway owns the oil beneath much of the North Sea. The people of Norway consume 10% of the annual North Sea oil production. Norway sells the other 90% to anyone who wants it. The US is a big buyer of North Sea oil.

Thus, in recent years Norwegians have enjoyed unprecedented prosperity thanks to high oil prices.

When it comes to managing their oil reserves, Norwegians do a good job. If the US had similar laws regarding the exploitation of our domestic oil reserves, we too would enjoy some of the same benefits — mainly from paying Americans to get American oil from the ground to the consumer.

The example of Norway should cause you to ask yourself why Iraq, Iran and Nigeria are overrun with poverty when there is so much oil money flowing into those countries?

Its far from common knowledge. I’m an Environmental Studies major, and a lot of what we cover includes issues of social justice and equity. I also have friends who live on reservations, and have witnessed the poverty in First Nations communities first hand.

J:
Very true. I think if you are to look closely at any of the wealthier nations, you will find links to a colonial past of some sorts. I believe that this is because a feature of development is that it relies on underdevelopment of a satellite nation.

Employers are in business to prosper. Not to go broke making others happy. Other than slaves, workers have always had the CHOICE of accepting or rejecting job offers. The chief cause of GM’s bankruptcy was its high wage and benefit structure. The United Autoworkers Union dug its own grave.

You wrote:

“Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account.”

Yeah. They get the worst deals imaginable when they sign contracts to play basketball, football, baseball and box. They get raw deals on those recording contracts and they get lousy compensation when they appear in movies and on TV. It’s terrible.

You wrote:

“3.Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans”

Human capital refers to the stock of competences, knowledge and personality attributes embodied in the ability to perform labor so as to produce economic value. It is the attributes gained by a worker through education and experience.

High human capital = high productivity = wealth. I think the formula is pretty much the same anywhere. Maybe the exception are countries with vast natural resources to exploit, like the Gulf States where they can have great wealthy by luck of floating on a bed of oil and nothing more. Take away Saudi Arabia’s oil it would be another Afghanistan.

Labour: at cut rates from people of colour: slaves, coolies, migrant workers, Mexican nannies and landscapers, etc. Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account.

Then it would follow then that Portugal should be the richest country in western Europe since it dominated the slave trade for almost 2 centuries. (and thus per capita derived more money than any other European country from the slave trade and from it’s colonies in Macau, East Timor, Mozambique, Brazil, Angola, Goa, etc…) Instead it is the poorest country in Western Europe deriving much of wealth from German and British tourists.

Also as colonies go, Brazil derived even more of it’s money from slavery and had slaves for 20 years longer than the US… yet it has substantially less money than the US.

America was lucky to fight its last wars on other peoples land. WWI and WWII would have cost the US, if its cities and industrial complexes had been in ruins. America was also fortunate to get the better scientist just before and after WWII.

no_slappz,

I wonder if you really think it is a choice of working and not working. I don’t think that you ever had a choice between working and starvation.

There is quite a substantial difference between an auto workers salary and someone who nailed railroad ties in the ground in the 19th century. That is adjusting for cost of living in the different time period. I also have yet to see what the upper level management did to deserve their salaries and bonuses, which was quite a big difference between the auto worker in the same time period. Don’t try to flim flam me, I have observed and I am not stupid or ignorant that I can’t see through to those CEO Clothes.

I always find it very interesting when a professional from the CATO Institute argues that a laborer as an individual can negotiate their wages as a professional. It seems that this is where you have gotten your taking points.

Also, my VP who was Black and female probably made 5 times what I made, yet I reported directly to her. The CEO (on the technological side) of the company I worked for at the time was of Afro-Caribbean origin and from the UK.)

As I stated before, I loved and respected my boss. She was the best damn boss I’ve ever had – and that even includes people I reported to in the Military!!!

Your comments that “white people tell lies and think black people are stupid” is certainly not true in my case!!! Did you realize there are actually some black people that tell lies and think white people are stupid?

(obviously the color of one’s skin does not make anybody liars or stupid)

I think the primary reason any country gets rich, and more importantly stays rich is due to a high level of human capital.

Yep, those are my thoughts also…

Moving away from “White” countries look at resource poor but economically rich Japan versus resource rich (for many decades the largest exporter of rice..) but economically poor Thailand or economically rich and resource poor (almost zero..) Singapore versus much poorer economically Malaysia which is resource rich. The differences in the examples above would seem to be almost entirely explained by the differences in human capital.

I think facing the facts we know ( like if a white person and black person aply for the same job or try to get the same apartment ,the white guy will get it), there is no doubt that white people have huge advantages in certain areas, even with laws on the books.

But some of these huge wealth and power empires that were built off western expansion and profits from slavery, were rober barons, walking over everyone in their path. They did not share the wealth with other whites.

The recent financial crisis is a perfect example of a few huge money people exploiting many people and they tried to take it too far and who gets hurt is every one else but espcialy minorities as unempoyment statistics show. Whites account for more poverty in the USA than blacks. Of course percentage wise is a differant story.

I do beleive there are busineses that were built independent of exploitation of any one that through hard work and fullfiling a need of that product at that time, became succesful enterprises.

Its not like a special club of whites where once you get in, every one is handshakes and winks and help on the way to riches.Ive been ripped off by whites in my business worse than any black person ever did to me.

It is dog eat dog no matter what. The market place is cruel to everyone but of course, racism has sadled blacks with huge handicaps to overcome, and some have, quite handily.And history is replete with plenty of examples of white cruelty and exploitation to walk over the backs of everyone to get their wealth, and it is passed down generation to generation.

“”In a nutshell, everything we got from America in World War II was free,” says economic historian Professor Mark Harrison, of Warwick University.”

“The post-war loan was part-driven by the Americans’ termination of the scheme. Under the programme, the US had effectively donated equipment for the war effort, but anything left over in Britain at the end of hostilities and still needed would have to be paid for.”

In addition after the war the Soviets basically said that given their enormous sacrifice (reasonable given their loss of 27 million people..) against the Germans they had no intention of repaying their debt to the US.

Net net.. the expenditures by the US government in WWII were very large…. from fighting the Japanese in the Pacific and fighting the Germans in Europe and the post war occupation of Japan and Germany and the financial aid to much of Western Europe and certainly exceeded any financial remuneration they received from the British empire.

What was gained was a modern industrial infrastructure with basically almost no competition for one and half decades. (In 1953 the US produced 75% of the world’s industrial items…)

I think facing the facts we know ( like if a white person and black person aply for the same job or try to get the same apartment ,the white guy will get it), there is no doubt that white people have huge advantages in certain areas, even with laws on the books.

Jimmy Walker, yes of Good Times fame who in his later years became an outspoken Republican actually made a great case in favor of affirmative action, which he deemed a necessary evil. Due to the fact that 90% of all jobs are not advertised and only found through word of mouth and social connections, and given that most whites are socially close only to other whites, that it will put blacks at a disadvantage.

He made a good point. The best paying and most rewarding jobs are not advertised in the classified, they are through referrals. Since whites have traditionally had the best jobs and most positions of power, when jobs open up, they are most likely to fill it through word of mouth rather than something democratic like a job ad. If fact when I think about it, whenever the boss needed to bring in more help, they would ask, “do you know anyone that would be good for this position?” They will do that before they advertise the job. So even if companies were 100% non-racist in hiring, this still presents a problem since society is still socially segregated and the best jobs are found through social networking(where race place a factor in who you know).

“America was lucky to fight its last wars on other peoples land. WWI and WWII would have cost the US, if its cities and industrial complexes had been in ruins.”

America — and by extension, the entire world — would have been far more fortunate if Germany and Japan had abandoned their imperial goals and engaged in no wars in the 20th century.

However, the US has benefited from its location on the globe and the bodies of water around us.

You wrote:

“America was also fortunate to get the better scientist just before and after WWII.”

Yes. The US attracts and produces the greatest human capital.

You wrote:

“no_slappz,I wonder if you really think it is a choice of working and not working. I don’t think that you ever had a choice between working and starvation. ”

It has been a long, long time since anyone in the US faced starvation. Today we have an obesity problem. The US is not the Sudan.

You wrote:

“There is quite a substantial difference between an auto workers salary and someone who nailed railroad ties in the ground in the 19th century.”

Thank god for the automobile. The golden age of railroad construction is over. Burlington Northern may add more miles of track, but future increases will never approach the rate seen in the 19th century. But car production will soar. Too bad a lot of the manufacturing will occur outside the US.

You wrote:

“I also have yet to see what the upper level management did to deserve their salaries and bonuses, which was quite a big difference between the auto worker in the same time period. Don’t try to flim flam me, I have observed and I am not stupid or ignorant that I can’t see through to those CEO Clothes.”

The UAW should have bought GM years ago. Then the union would have only itself to blame for the company’s collapse. Actually managing the company would have made it clear to the union that management takes skill. But, in fact, the UAW understood this reality. That’s why the union was never willing to buy all the common stock and run the show, then distribute all the profits to the union members.

If White Americans read what I write – and clearly some do – that is great. At least they have heard what I have to say even if they utterly disagree. Maybe it will make more sense to them down the road. But in the main I do not write for them.

I know you don’t write for them, but I can’t help thinking it would be great to have white Americans read it and hear their responses. I don’t think white Americans (or whites in general) read this blog or offer their comments, which is something that surprises me. There are a few of them, but only a few, and, sadly, comments are often less than constructive.

My SO reads this blog from time to time. He doesm’t feel the need to comment. He is slightly put off by the generalizations made about white people, like “95 percent of white people are racist,” and he thinks if I keep reading this blog I will end up hating white people and leave him (never!). And he is probably one of the more open-minded white people I’ve met, if not the most. So I think sometimes white people may not like the general tone of the blog or they might be hesitant to comment.

“News flash. The Natives had no claim to the land that Colonists were obliged to honor. That may sound harsh, but that’s reality.”

You responded:

“WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? Dude, that is ridiculous, even for you.”

You really need to grasp the concept that until relatively recently, control of land went to those with the biggest guns.

You can pretend to be aghast at the ways of the world, but the facts are the facts — for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history.

Now that the entire planet is settled and sovereignty has been established, there are no new lands to conquer. These days, only minor border changes occur.

Not long ago Yugoslavia was one country. Now it is three. There was West Germany and East Germany following WWII. Now there is only Germany.

Meanwhile, during WWII Russia seized the Karelia, part of Finland. A region rich in natural resources. Finland is still waiting for the return of this real estate.

Iraq rolled into Kuwait and seized it, but was able to hold it only briefly.

The USSR was one nation comprising many republics. Now all the former soviet republics are independent nations.

The establishment of almost every nation in the middle east was handled by the British in the first half of the 20th century. Before that, the entire region was like Afghanistan — wild and ungoverned.

You really need to understand the history of humanity was, for a few centuries, largely about the projection of force around the globe. Then, in the second half of the 20th century, it became much more about trade.

But with nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the crackpot Iranians, projecting power around the planet will return to its priority role.

So I think sometimes white people may not like the general tone of the blog or they might be hesitant to comment.

True. Well, all the websites get much more general hits than comments, and yes, I guess white people do visit this blog, but choose not to comment.

However, while there are many generalizations here, Abagond’s blog is very well written and it does seem like a place that offers an opportunity for a discussion and benefit of the doubt.

As for generalizations, I think there are much more generalizations about women than about the white people (though I might be biased here- I identify myself more as being a woman than being white, so maybe I don’t pay that much attention on stereotypes about white people).

As for generalizations, I think there are much more generalizations about women than about the white people (though I might be biased here- I identify myself more as being a woman than being white, so maybe I don’t pay that much attention on stereotypes about white people).

I arrived here a little before the end of last year and I liked the blog, so I decided to begin reading it from the beginning. I noticed as time went along, posts about women became less and less frequent, and the posts regarding race relations became more frequent. These posts are also more popular as far as comments, and some of the commenters have strong views on these issues.

Starvation does not mean absolute death. It can mean to suffer from hunger.

What on earth do mean that the African has an aversion to science an math? You have absolutely no proof. Or is this a projection?

Perhaps because I am a woman, I haven’t seen any employer care if you are good at science and math unless you can claim the magic Negro title. They will hire you , but it wont advance you. It seems the more you are a critical thinker, the more you are seen as a disruptive negro. Heaven forbid if you can out think their “Wunderkind.” That puts you in the backwater.

There is a lot of innovation taking place in Africa. Just not on the scale that would satisfy your market friends.

I would guess that most white people, having no ecuation about racism at all veyond what the Disney Channel feeds them, don’t comment because they feel insulted.

Thad, I understand you’re an atheist (agnostic?), so I get your comments about God. But Disney??? 😀

Do you truly believe it has THAT much influence on Americans like religion? Or perhaps you mean on something more general?

Also, Abagond’s posts are much less “insulting” than one might expect from this type of blogs, so I really don’t get. If I were a white American wanting to discuss race issues, I’d definitely choose this blog to comment.

@Natasha W

Now that you mentioned it, there seems to be less and less posts about women. I wonder why. Not that I miss those posts. (Even though I must admit I didn’t mind them as much as I’d like to mind them- as a thick woman, something in me liked the fact he’s talking very positively about given body shape… And yes, I am ashamed of that, but if we’re honest here (we are, aren’t we?), I must admit it).

I think Thad is right: some of what I say turns off white people. I could guard my words and maybe get more white commenters but that would go against my philosophy of writing.

Agreed. The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what you’re saying are Mira and Macon D. I’m sure there are others, but they don’t come to mind right now. They have a better understanding of where you’re coming from. Others just blow it off.

Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember.

What makes America different is that while the South was a colony in the style of Haiti or Brazil – a big money-making operation for the benefit of Europe – the North, particularly New England, was not.

Whites came to New England not to get rich but to start the world over again according to their religion. It was just what it called itself: a NEW England. A new England planted in North America. And so its game was very different: it wanted to take control of the trade between America and England, not merely take part in it. Which it did in time. And so more of the profits from slave labour stayed inside America than was the case with Brazil.

The North made money not just from the trade in tobacco and cotton but earlier from the trade in slaves.

Also, Abagond’s posts are much less “insulting” than one might expect from this type of blogs, so I really don’t get. If I were a white American wanting to discuss race issues, I’d definitely choose this blog to comment.

What do you mean “this type of blog?” When I came here I wasn’t under the impression that this was a blog solely for discussing race and racial issues, and many of the initial posts weren’t on these topics.

Now that you mentioned it, there seems to be less and less posts about women. I wonder why. Not that I miss those posts. (Even though I must admit I didn’t mind them as much as I’d like to mind them- as a thick woman, something in me liked the fact he’s talking very positively about given body shape… And yes, I am ashamed of that, but if we’re honest here (we are, aren’t we?), I must admit it).

Lol, he can leave out the posts about women. I had to give my SO the side-eye one time I saw him ogling a photo of Toccara Jones from abagond’s post on her.

“Agreed. The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what you’re saying are Mira and Macon D. I’m sure there are others, but they don’t come to mind right now. They have a better understanding of where you’re coming from. Others just blow it off.”

LMAO.

Mira is not White American or even Anglo, so she has no racist white pride to defend:

Good question. I guess by “this type of blog” I meant “blog discussing race issues”. You’re right: many posts are not about race (or women for that matter), but the first ones I found were about race issues. (I found the site vie Google search, I think the exact search was “white men and black women”- I wanted to see why that “combination” is considered less common than white woman/black man one).

abagond, it’s because they don’t want to feel like bad people. And this blog makes them feel that way. It makes them feel guilty and uncomfortable to read all these posts and comments about white people. Of those that don’t feel guilty, many probably think you are blowing issues out of proportion. So you just get the white supremacists to comment. 🙂

Although I do recall a white female commenter from days past called “Dedabets.” I wonder where she went.

Mira, I came here via Google too. I searched for “race and dating,” and came upon the Columbia University study post. But, interestingly enough, I wasn’t googling regarding my relationship, but because of a comment that one of our white male friends made, “I’m not attracted to black women. Period. It’s a preference.” I’ve heard such comments before, but never so bluntly, so I decided to see what the general consensus was.

The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what you’re saying are Mira and Macon D.

Sorry. I find Macon D to be a bit of an agony sister. He’s not an educator: it seems to me that he’s ascribed to himself the role of “white man who knows all there is to know about other white peoples’ racism” and chooses to use that role to shake his finger at white people he thinks are acting poorly.

That’s a very comfortable position for him to be in, especially as it’s anonymous. I don’t think he can even conceive of discussing race with someone whose ideas don’t match his, which – in terms of fighting racism – makes him something of a zero to the left of the decimal point.

Also, Macon’s site to me seems to be simply a listing o memes regarding race. Discussion becomes a sort of competition between who can cite said memes quiskest and fastest.

The discussion we’re having about the Irish, for example, is a very crucial piece of the racism puzzle for me, white trash being traditionally considered “degenerate” in racial terms and the Irish being the epitome of this. This discussion would neveroccur over on Macon’s site because someone would simply say “Oh, the Irish as slaves argument! Shut up, you evil racist you!” and that would be that.

I think Macon believes that he knows all there is to know about race and that he’s one hell of a white guy for being that way.

I could never imagine Macon, for example, saying one single thing about race that doesn’t follow a closely scripted line which involves clear-cut good guys and clear-cut bad guys.

Abagond sez:Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember.

As was the U.S. in the 1700s, remember. Brazil became effectively independent in 1809, 20 years after the U.S. Length of the colonial period thus wasn’t the problem here.

What makes America different is that while the South was a colony in the style of Haiti or Brazil – a big money-making operation for the benefit of Europe – the North, particularly New England, was not.

Whites came to New England not to get rich but to start the world over again according to their religion. It was just what it called itself: a NEW England. A new England planted in North America. And so its game was very different: it wanted to take control of the trade between America and England, not merely take part in it. Which it did in time. And so more of the profits from slave labour stayed inside America than was the case with Brazil.

Exactly.

I hate to say this, but No_Slappz is fundamentally correct, Abagond: outside of a few very special circumstances, slavery pretty much is a money-loser over the medium and long-term. Money loser to the slave owners, that is. There are excellent sociological and economic reasons for this, the main one being that it is far more economically rational to purchase labor power than the laborers themselves.

The people who make money on slavery are the merchants: the folks who sell the slaves and sell the slave owners all their consumable goods. The folks who buy the output of the plantations and transform it into industrial goods.

In the case of the U.S., the North AS WELL as Britain fulfilled this role, so the country itself became rich well the south basically bled itself dry – or would have if slavery had gone on much longer.

In Brazil, everything went to the Brits – and this was long before independence. Many Brazilian economists, in fact, claim that it was Brazilian gold which financed the British industrial revolution. That’s quite plausible, seeing as how the economic movement between Brazil and Britain in the early 19th century was 4 or 5 times larger than the movement between Britain and the entire Indian subcontinent.

This is one of the problems with the “White are _____” thesis, which we’ve argued about back and forth ever since I showed up here.

There are a series of different structural positions within slavery and, later, racism and they all need to be filled in order for the machine to work. Cursing all whites as, essentially, slaveholders edits out the class and intra-ethnic struggles which were going on and which, in fact, made some of the more ugly aspects of racism possible.

By situating poor “free” whites (who were rarely free in any substantial sense of the word) as “superior” to blacks, the folks who really made hay off the slavery system were able to keep the game going by assuring an essentially split laboring class.

Racism only makes useful political and sociological sense when it’s integrated into a world view that sees its intersections with all the other “isms”: sexism and classism in particular. Without that kind of intersectionalist view, anti-racism loses any revolutionary potential in might have and becomes just another form of petite-bourgeosie moaning about “rights” – as if any rights actually existed independent of our political and economic system.

True, true, Disney is everywhere and it does shape many people’s opinions, all over the world. I must admit I like some of their animated movies (I know, I know). Luckily, I think I didn’t understand them when I was a kid- so the potential way they shaped MY opinions might not be so bad.

But I don’t think it’s just about Disney. They are powerful, but not THAT powerful. They’re obviously making and selling something people were ready to buy because that was something they already believed in, or an image they already had about themselves.

Speaking of non-racist whites (those 5% or so, according to Abagond 😉 ), I do think there’s some sort of… competition to prove your anti-racism. Nothing wrong in being anti-racist, we are all trying to be that (aren’t we?), but to push that as some sort of proving how generally good and nice person you are- I think it’s pointless and bad and missing the point.

If you want to have a non-white friend (or boyfriend) to show that “black people like you”- that’s bad and you’re missing the point. If you go to race or “black” blogs to hear black people tell you you’re not a racist- that’s bad and you’re missing the point. In other words, if you discuss these issues not because of the issues, but to get “approval” from non-white people and an “anti-racist” gold medal- that’s bad and you’re missing the point. It’s not really about you. Even if you truly aren’t racist, it doesn’t mean anybody should talk about it- it’s not really that important.

So, as much as I appreciate leigh’s comment about me not being a “typical white commenter”, I don’t think I should be “proud” of it. I mean, I am glad someone said a nice thing about me (at least I see it’s meant to be a nice thing- correct me if I’m wrong), but it doesn’t really make me “proud” in a way “ooooh, non-white people like me and my comments, so that means I am really not a racist, so it means I’m a nice person”. Yes, I am being sarcastic, but sometimes I do think white people are desperate to be called non-racists, as if that is the most important thing when discussing race issues.

Being non-racist doesn’t really mean you’re a good person. Sure, one’s lack of racism is a good thing, but you can still be a bad human being for all we know. I am not sure if the opposite is possible (to be a racist but otherwise decent human)- but I’m trying to say being anti-racist doesn’t automatically make you a good person. (Not to mention that commenting on a “race blog” doesn’t really make you anti-racist in the first place).

Abagond said:
“My grandfather came to America with $25 in his pocket”), they are forgetting even that little bit of history: if hard work and the right values were enough, then why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot.”

Many European countries were very rigidly class bound so people were unable to achieve social mobility even if they were willing to work hard and had the right values. America is not as class bound as Europe was and therefore people were able to find opportunities to progress regardless of their status.

To further illustrate my point, I live in Jamaica which is still a rigidly class bound society where social connections determine one’s ability to achieve success. My grandparents’ ex-gardener (a black Jamaican) went to Florida in the 1980s and started buying old houses, fixing them up and selling at a profit. He owns a house with a swimming pool and a Mercedes Benz. In all likelihood he would not attained this kind of upward mobility had he stayed in Jamaica.

From what I have read of a lot of your comments on abagond’s blog, you seem (to me) that you’re sincere and respectful when responding to others. I also like how you ask genuine questions to increase your understanding regarding people’s experiences/views. Your contributions to this blog are much appreciated.

“Starvation does not mean absolute death. It can mean to suffer from hunger.”

Keep trying. The US is not the Sudan. In this country there are no swollen bellies sticking out of undernourished kids. I repeat, in the US we have an OBESITY problem.

You asked:

“What on earth do mean that the African has an aversion to science an math? You have absolutely no proof.”

No proof? Really. Virtually no blacks pursue careers in science or engineering. Almost no blacks get Phds in a long list of technical areas.

The avoidance starts early. Math SAT scores of black students are significantly lower than math scores of whites and asians. Moreover, blacks are less likely than whites and asians to take the SAT and graduate from college. Hence the math/science weakness is understated.

You wrote:

“Perhaps because I am a woman, I haven’t seen any employer care if you are good at science and math unless you can claim the magic Negro title.”

Oh. Your statement makes it clear that even you believe no blacks enter the fields of science or engineering. Otherwise, you would realize that, if a person were an engineer or scientist, his knowledge of science and math would be crucial.

You wrote:

“They will hire you , but it wont advance you. It seems the more you are a critical thinker, the more you are seen as a disruptive negro. Heaven forbid if you can out think their “Wunderkind.” That puts you in the backwater.”

Apparently you believe scientists and engineers merely devote their days to pounding round pegs into round holes.

You wrote:

“There is a lot of innovation taking place in Africa.”

False. Unfortunately, Africans have proven they are unable to re-invent the wheel.

Moreover, the thug leaders are ensuring the continuation of staggering infant mortality rates and the unchecked spread of most water-borne diseases — problems that were long ago overcome in the white world.

You wrote:

“Just not on the scale that would satisfy your market friends.”

“Scale” is not the issue. It is the utter lack of innovation that is the problem. I’m still waiting for news of that first prosperous and educated black nation, where there are scientists, engineers, doctors, lawyers, professors, world-class colleges, companies manufacturing advanced goods and clean drinking water for everyone in the country.

“…the facts are the facts — for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history.

Now that the entire planet is settled and sovereignty has been established, there are no new lands to conquer. These days, only minor border changes occur.”

Maybe not for Westerners etc, ie ‘no new lands to conquer’ – but for the likes of Muslims as per your blog etc there is also the possibilty of ‘re-conquering’. I am sure even you may have to concede this is a sort of ‘dialectical process’, which will probably go on for ever

You seem to be among the misinformed or the uncomprehending people who think “starvation” is the same as “hungry.”

Yes you are right. Last night I went to the local dumpster, dove in and managed to rustle up a meal, the things people throw away! It wasn’t bad! I used a a lighter to cook the meal. But hey, I was starving, er no, I was hungry.

For various reasons there are some people in the US who do not get enough to eat.

Yes I wonder why? Not enough dumpsters I guess. Go to the rich areas, they throw out a lot of great food. Keep an eye out for the cops though.

You really need to grasp the concept that until relatively recently, control of land went to those with the biggest guns.

Like in a John Wayne movie?

You can pretend to be aghast at the ways of the world, but the facts are the facts — for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history.

Two wrongs don’t make a right but they sure as hell makes you even! Good advice! I’m going to beat the sh$t out of my neighbour! He keeps throwing garbage onto my side of the property. When I go to court, that will be my defense. “Looky here Judge, that gearbox keeps throwing garbage onto my property, why last week I was almost decapitated by a plexi-glass ‘sun’ window when it dislodged and flew off his roof”! “According to Mr. slappz, I can take actions as vigilantism has been around since forever as had murder, pillaging and rapine! I am only conquering his ability to throw garbage onto my property”! “Of course I’ll appeal my conviction, wish me luck”!

Before that, the entire region was like Afghanistan — wild and ungoverned.

That sounds romantic! I bet they could get many best selling ‘bodice rippers’ out of that! Plenty of talk of his ‘mighty sword’!

He seems to have a reflex that causes him to conclude any action involving the white power structures of the US is corrupt, criminal and racist.

No, it is his sphincter reflex when reading your posts! It induces gaseous responses in him as it does others. It is indicative of what you are full of as it elicits these physical responses as well as unremitting laughter. It is no mistake that you take on the moniker slappz, you are a laugh a minute and a half! Thanks.

Try this one. What would Africa be like today if whites had never colonized the continent?

What would you be like if you were black? I know! You would be arguing the reverse!

Moreover, virtually every function slaves once performed can now be handled by machines that are many times more efficient and much less costly than human workers.

Like in the Transformer movies? No thanks!

Thad is correct, if slavery correlates directly with national wealth, why is Brazil still a third-world nation?
Only the phantom knows!

Unfortunately, until blacks overcome their general aversion to science and math, Africa and other largely black regions will remain economic backwaters dependent on the goodwill of white nations

I agree with the statement that this blog is talking about the rich people in America (who have largely been white), and not about everyone. And it is true that probably all nations have a sordid history, but the rich ones (like America) are big targets for this sort of discussion (because a lot of people know about America). This blog is about “some” white Americans, and comments have derailed the discussion into a diatribe about black countries/people which has nothing to do with Abagond’s assertion…this topic (rightly or wrongly) is about white Americans. I do think it is naive (at best) for anyone to claim they succeeded *all alone* using their trusty bootstraps when everyone has had assistance from someone (some had to hire that person for a job, someone had to sell them a house, and a lot of times connections come from one’s friends).

Coulter has a sharp wit and is remarkably accurate with many of her commentaries.

It’s interesting that you mention Shockley. When blacks drop his name, they seem to express the view that he was no more than the sum of his views on race. It is unlikely more than a few of his black critics know anything about his life’s work.

Meanwhile, where are the black physicists? The black guys working on the next generation of semiconductors?

By the way, if there were a starvation problem in the US, the National Geographic Magazine would have been all over it decades and decades ago. Along with Life, Look, Time, Newsweek, and every other media venue capable of stirring up a storm about suffering in the land of plenty.

But even in the poorest, most remote and alienated parts of the US, everyone seems to eat.

But even in the poorest, most remote and alienated parts of the US, everyone seems to eat.

The dumpsters are full of tasty tidbits if you can’t afford groceries. A lighter to heat up the food costs a dollar. There is also road kill for your protein requirements. I have heard that rat meat tastes like rabbit or chicken. You can cut off the rotted parts of the vegetables you get from the dumpster when making the rat stew! Sometimes a restaurant will give you throwaway food if nothing else but to get you the hell away from there as it is bad for business!

I apologize Abagond if this is off topic. However, I have to say I don’t think that “black guys” have to have a particular profession/job; that’s part of having the freedom to employ oneself at whatever legal work one chooses. ***I know this post was about America so please delete if off topic***

“Maybe not for Westerners etc, ie ‘no new lands to conquer’ – but for the likes of Muslims as per your blog etc there is also the possibilty of ‘re-conquering’.”

Muslims have no chance of re-conquering the world, though it is obvious that is the goal Islam. In short, few members of the modern world are willing to reverse course and turn back the clock to muhammad’s 7th Century.

If Islam were to take the world to a brighter future, that might change things. But the muslim clowns would rather spread misery and backwardness.

Fortunately, in all the ways that matter, muslims are incompetent. Iran may make the fatal mistake of attempting its own brand of nuclear mayhem which will subject it to a punishing Pyrrhic Loss.

I think the question muslims are now debating is whether Obama, as a former muslim, is an apostate. Or will he re-emerge as one of muhammad’s followers?

Hopefully Obama’s softness on muslim lunacy, his socialist agenda, and his bungling of almost every one of his stated goals will bring about his defeat in 2012. Given his weakening support after only one year in office, it will take a lot for him to win re-election.

You wrote:

“I am sure even you may have to concede this is a sort of ‘dialectical process’, which will probably go on for ever”

Yes, we can count on continued conflict. But more democracy and capitalism is the best way to reduce problems.

Hopefully Obama’s softness on muslim lunacy, his socialist agenda, and his bungling of almost every one of his stated goals will bring about his defeat in 2012. Given his weakening support after only one year in office, it will take a lot for him to win re-election.

Actually, i almost agree with you.

Obama’s probably the most level-headed preisdent the U.S. has had for years. 8 years of Bush created two wars, isolation of the States from its traditional allies and an economic collapse that’s bordering on a new great depression.

I think 8 more years of Republicans would finally pretty much drive the United States into the ground, which would probably be – overall – a good thing for the rest of the world.

Since you know my thoughts, then you must know that they approach the truth differently that yours.

I knew a Black physicist that was treated so badly that he decided to get a law degree. I knew Black students that were good in math and science, but looked to alternative careers, one even became a minister. You look at raw test scores and don’t see the individuals who have the education, test scores, but choose not to be the first or the person that has to overcome the perceptions of being not good enough. There are a lot of Black people who are scientist, but are not celebrities, I have worked with them. The jobs they have are very mundane, doing repetitive analysis day after day. Among them are many white folk in the same bolt. Most scientist are not superstars or make the salaries of most MBA’s. There isn’t a lot of incentive to become a scientist, when a business degree is valued more. Math people are getting IT degrees.

I think that you know this and like being the unique Negro, so you have to be contrary.

Actually, there’s a reason the U.S. got rich off of slavery and Brazil did not, but I wonder if anyone else around here knows it.

Well the US Civil war sort of hit the reset button on the wealth from slaves. I have read that some of cities in the US South before the war were very wealthy. Lincoln offered to pay off the Southern slave holders (as the British did previously with Jamaica..) but the Southerners refused. They enjoyed their vile racket and the wealth it produced.

As for the wealth sent to Britain by the slave trade, as Abagond acknowledged it was basically wiped out by WWII and as I have pointed it was not transferred to the US. Whatever wealth the Germans and Japanese had from their colonies (Germany had a few African colonies before WWI..) was wiped out by the devastating effects of WWI and WWII for Germany and WWII for Japan.

To Abagond:Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember.

Brazil was a Portuguese colony in the 1700s so I would presume that the bulk of the money went to Portugal. (Thad said some money went to the British but in the 19th century went Brazil was independent…) For all of the wealth that Portugal achieved through near monopolization of the slave trade for two centuries and it’s colonies seems to have dissipated since it is the poorest of Western European countries.

I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation.

Is that comment directed at me..? If so I never said such a thing. Of course some people made money off slavery and the slave trade. What I do assert is that slavery (and it’s milder European variant serfdom…) was a poor economic enterprise relative to other economic endeavors using paid labor.

Moving away from White countries (ok maybe off-White..?) we can talk about Turkey, the heart of the Ottoman Empire which lasted longer than the British Empire. They had slaves, engaged in slave trading, demanded tribute from their vassals yet it ranks at the same level as Mexico in GDP per capita.

I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation.

“Who Started the Triangular Trade?

For two hundred years, 1440-1640, Portugal had a monopoly on the export of slaves from Africa. It is notable that they were also the last European country to abolish the institution – although, like France, it still continued to work former slaves as contract laborers, which they called libertos or engagés à temps. It is estimated that during the 4 1/2 centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, Portugal was responsible for transporting over 4.5 million Africans (roughly 40% of the total).”

I mean, presuming that one’s an anti-imperialist, voting Republican would seem to be the way to go.

The US (in my opinion..) in heading for a protracted financial crisis as is the rest of the OECD. I just think Bush and company made things bubble up faster. A friend of mine who was running for mayor of his home town had a slogan that went “This town is going to hell and I am to see it get there as fast a possible…” He placed third. I haven’t been in touch with him for a while … maybe he went to work for the Bush administration.

The Swedish (including Finland) slave trade occurred in the early history of Sweden, and again during the 17th century, around the time Swedish overseas colonies were established in North America (1638) and in Africa (1650). It remained legal until 1813.

Uncle Milton sez:Well the US Civil war sort of hit the reset button on the wealth from slaves. I have read that some of cities in the US South before the war were very wealthy.

And every one of them was an import/export town where merchants were making bucks hand-over-fist.

It’s been very well shown, Milt, that slave-holders generally didn’t do good for themselves. Here in brazil, it was the importers and exporters that made up our first capitalist class. They were concentrated in Rio de Janeiro, another wealthy port town.

Slavery is basically clearcutting in the forest of economic activity. It can make some cash in the short run, but even over the mid term, it falls apart when it comes up against wage-based systems of labor.

Brazil was a Portuguese colony in the 1700s so I would presume that the bulk of the money went to Portugal. (Thad said some money went to the British but in the 19th century went Brazil was independent…)

If you really look into Brazilian colonial economics, you’ll see that what happened is that the wealth went to Portugual, which immediately used it to pay off staggering trade deficits with Britain.

“Obama’s probably the most level-headed preisdent the U.S. has had for years. 8 years of Bush created two wars, isolation of the States from its traditional allies and an economic collapse that’s bordering on a new great depression.”

Only someone with no knowledge of finance, economics, the last 40 years of US history, mixed with the capacity to believe Bush’s response to 9/11 was wrong can call Obama “level-headed.”

Obama, the former muslim, is beginning to look like the Manchurian Candidate.

“I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation.”

As I’ve said, you really really need a course in economics.

Slavery was profitable at times, and it was profitable for various participants in the Africa-to-plantation chain. But that does NOT mean it was profitable for every participant at all times.

Moreover, people make financial mistakes all the time. In recent years people bought homes expecting them to appreciate almost immediately. Instead, over the last couple of years, prices have dropped.

But the real estate brokers and mortgage issuers were paid, nonetheless. Of course the number of realtors and the number of mortgages issued in the last two years have declined. — a lot. Is there any meaningful difference between the roles of realtors and mortgage brokers versus their counterparts in the slave trade?

These days every buyer is thinking he may be purchasing his home at the bottom of real estate market. Eventually, we will pass the bottom and prices will begin to climb. But till then buyers may see the value of their homes slip.

Today, buyers and operators of businesses are in the same boat. That’s the same boat they were in during era of slavery.

How many industries that once formed the basis of major US fortunes are greatly diminished or no longer exist?

All you have to do is look at the changing names in the 30 companies included in the Dow Jones Industrial Average to get the answer. The Dow is about 110 years old and the only company in it today that was in it from the beginning is General Electric.

Microsoft is a Dow stock. The company is less than 30 years old and has been a public stockholder-owned company for less than 25 years. But it appears that Microsoft has passed its prime and the day is coming when another smart guy from Harvard or MIT will create the company that knocks Microsoft out of its place in the Dow.

The forces of economics make this change inevitable, just like the changes that eventually made slavery unprofitable.

Obama IS a former muslim. He was born to a muslim father. According to Islamic tradition, that means he was born a muslim.

He lived in Indonesia — a muslim nation, by law — during his formative years, and while there he attended a muslim school. Since the state religion of Indonesia is Islam, that means he was going to school in an Islamic environment.

No one at ages 8 to 12 escapes the psychological effects of complete immersion in his society. Kids are impressionable. They absorb lunacy without question, as all religions demand.

Anyway, Obama has not drifted too far from his Islamic roots. Nominally he became a Christian. But he picked Reverend Wright for his spiritual leader. Wright is a muslim in Christian robes. Wright made his position clear with his repeated praise for Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam.

As for demonstrations of his sympathies for Islam, it is painfully clear in his approach to Israel and the so-called Palestinians, as well as in his goals for the US role in the middle east. He is going to stand by while Iran obtains nuclear weapons, which Iran fully intends to use against Israel. Ahadenijad has already mocked Obama, which makes it obvious that Iran will ignore Obama’s begging.

“I knew a Black physicist that was treated so badly that he decided to get a law degree.”

I went to engineering school with people — white — who became doctors, lawyers and MBAs. So what? As for the black physicist you claim to have known, perhaps he was a lousy student. I knew white students who were discouraged by professors who suggested their future was probably elsewhere. Some people call painful advice harrassment or mistreatment, when, in fact, the recipients are hearing what they need to hear.

You wrote:

“I knew Black students that were good in math and science, but looked to alternative careers, one even became a minister.”

I knew white high-school students who were good in math and science, even going so far as to major in these fields in college. I can recall one who then became an actor who has had many roles on TV and in movies.

You wrote:

“You look at raw test scores and don’t see the individuals who have the education, test scores, but choose not to be the first or the person that has to overcome the perceptions of being not good enough.”

False. Anyway, with respect to this discussion, I am looking at the Big Picture. Bottom line — blacks score much lower than whites and asians on standardized math and science tests.

You wrote:

“There are a lot of Black people who are scientist, but are not celebrities,”

No, there are not a lot of black scientists. There are virtually none. Scientists have Phds in their fields. Meanwhile, scientists — white, asian or black — are rarely celebrities.

You wrote:

“I have worked with them. The jobs they have are very mundane, doing repetitive analysis day after day. Among them are many white folk in the same bolt.”

You seem to be writing about lab technicians or other people who are part of a scientific team. But not true scientists.

You wrote:

“Most scientist are not superstars or make the salaries of most MBA’s. There isn’t a lot of incentive to become a scientist, when a business degree is valued more. Math people are getting IT degrees.”

The preceding is true. But, as always, you are dodging the issue of why so few blacks are advancing the state of knowledge in technical areas.

You wrote:

“I think that you know this and like being the unique Negro, so you have to be contrary.”

If I were, as you say, the unique Negro, I would be truly unique. Why? Because I am not a Negro.

Wow. And here I was under the impression that it was the conservative American ideology that a man be judged by what he does and not by who his fathers were or where he was born.

As for Obama being muslim because he praised Farrakhan at one time or another, hell, that must make Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Billy Graham Jewish, then. After all, they’ve all praised Israel endlessly.

No, there are not a lot of black scientists. There are virtually none. Scientists have Phds in their fields. Meanwhile, scientists — white, asian or black — are rarely celebrities.

Bullshit.One of the men who discovered the structure of DNA was black. Won a Nobel Prize for it, too. 😀

The totality of your existence is irrelevant.
*********************************

Why say something so inherently evil and lacking in empathy. To utter something so demeaning and carelessly speaks to your own virulence and complete contempt for Black people. That is something social darwinists and eugenicists say. That is something that Whites have uttered in some convoluted form or another to Black people ad nauseam.

It always comes down to diminishing the accomplishments and contributions of Black people as irrelevant and of course non existent. Hathor has the wisdom of experience and she has personally seen the breadth of many hotspots in Black culture. She is deserving of existence and is relevant as a human being.

This statement plainly encompasses why White men, White people can never truly see Blacks as even compareably human.

Only someone with no knowledge of finance, economics, the last 40 years of US history, mixed with the capacity to believe Bush’s response to 9/11 was wrong can call Obama “level-headed.”

Level-headed! A physiological impossibility! We would all look like Wile E. Coyote after having an acme anvil dropped on our heads!

As I’ve said, you really really need a course in economics.

Go play Bingo or buy a lottery ticket! Help the economy out!

But that does NOT mean it was profitable for every participant at all times.

Is there anything 100% profitable? If so, be a pal and tell everyone.

Moreover, people make financial mistakes all the time.

Really? I never realized that, but in hindsight you’re right, I should never have purchased those cheap shoes, they are already falling off my feet. Again your advice and insights are invaluable!

In recent years people bought homes expecting them to appreciate almost immediately. Instead, over the last couple of years, prices have dropped.

That’s capitalism for you! You take your chances.

Is there any meaningful difference between the roles of realtors and mortgage brokers versus their counterparts in the slave trade?

Yes, the realtors are selling houses, not human beings. I don’t think you could have purchased slaves with a 20% down payment and a mortgage plan. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Eventually, we will pass the bottom and prices will begin to climb.

For once I agree with you! Now’s the time to buy property for investment purposes. Of course this depends on the market in the particular area. Toronto for example has a booming real estate market, it is a seller’s paradise right now. However if it crashes, watch out! I believe the Chicago real estate market is ‘dead’, purchase there.

Today, buyers and operators of businesses are in the same boat. That’s the same boat they were in during era of slavery.

Yes the Titanic!

How many industries that once formed the basis of major US fortunes are greatly diminished or no longer exist?

That’s the nature of capitalism. Do you have something against capitalism? I enjoy the fruits of capitalism as it keeps me in shoes, purses, clothes, Belgium chocolate etc!

another smart guy from Harvard or MIT will create the company that knocks Microsoft out of its place in the Dow.

Any suggestions as to who this might be? Another point I agree with you on, a miracle!

The forces of economics make this change inevitable

This is with everything in life. Help a heifer out, provide some tips for investments.

I can recall one who then became an actor who has had many roles on TV and in movies.

Who, Mel Blanc? He did the voice overs for the Bug Bunny cartoons! Fabulous actor! I love Bugs Bunny, Tweety Bird and Pepe La Pew! They’re my favourite actors, or should I say animal actors! I cry as I type this, it brings back such pleasant memories! I’m going to pop a Bugs Bunny tape in a watch it now!

hathor,
My impressions of you are based on, and confined to, the comments you post. The totality of your existence is irrelevant.
Meanwhile, I present myself on other sites as I do here.

Are you computer generated? As for the other sites, you have been banned from most of them, Consider yourself lucky you are allowed to do so here! That puts me in mind of the song, “Thanks for the Memories!” My feelings of you are that of an automaton. You have little or no redeeming features based upon what you write. You are the definition of incongruous, as I doubt you would utter these views to a black person’s face. That is if you know any black people in an intimate way. If you do, do you spout what is ultimately tripe to them? You are deserving of any ridicule meted out. Being such an automaton you shouldn’t mind.

no_slappz, is a very good commentator on this blog. He contributes different and fresh opinions on a blog that mostly consist of anti white and ant-American commentators. I don’t always agree with his opinion but I think its great that he doesn’t have a group think mentality.

I don’t always agree with his opinion but I think its great that he doesn’t have a group think mentality.

Group think? He espouses nothing but ‘group think’, white supremacist ‘group think’. You agree with most of it, hence your characterization of being anti-American, anti-white is one and the same as anti-American to you. No one agrees with every opinion, it is absurd to think this.

He contributes different and fresh opinions on a blog that mostly consist of anti white and ant-American commentators.

‘Different’, yes, fresh, no. He only reiterate the same views in general as do other white supremacists site, same sh#t, different toilet bowl.

I posted this question on a different thread and got no response, I’m not trying to “derail” as abagond says, but I don’t know where else to ask this question. This is to all black christian.

As a black person and christian, how do you feel about verses like

Leviticus 25: 45-46

45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOR EVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

So basically it is okay to enslave people that are not Jews.

Or when Jesus says in Luke 12:46-47

46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

47 And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be BEATEN with many stripes.

This is an honest question, and one of the reasons I stopped believing in Christianity, how do you reconcile these verses and many many others that condone slavery?

Based on your statement above, you have defined yourself as an automaton. I agree. You do respond predictably.

You wrote:

“You have little or no redeeming features based upon what you write.”

Based on your writing efforts here, you have always struggled with composition.

You wrote:

“You are the definition of incongruous, as I doubt you would utter these views to a black person’s face.”

Why would I not “utter my views to a black person’s face”?

You wrote:

“That is if you know any black people in an intimate way. If you do, do you spout what is ultimately tripe to them?”

Intimate? No. Casually? Yes.

You wrote:

“You are deserving of any ridicule meted out. Being such an automaton you shouldn’t mind.”

The amusing part of your rant comes from what you do not understand. It is easy to have face-to-face debates with people if at least one person — me — knows enough to control the situation.

You are correct that it does not bother me when people like you try to dominate a debate by lobbing insults. In your case, as it is in almost every case, ridicule and sarcasm expose your total lack of knowledge.

In a room full of people who are equally ignorant, you might get a laugh or two, but, in fact, it rarely works that way for long. Especially for someone with your limited grasp of humor techniques.

Most often, people in the vicinity take a serious interest in what is said — the content — and relate to the moment in a way that reflects the intellectual soundness and civility of the discourse — even if they dislike what they hear.

Google has been insanely profitable and will remain that way for several more years. But that does NOT mean its stock will rise.

Apple has been extremely profitable the last few years due to the iPod and the iPhone. It’s computer business is a small contributor to profits. Its new products may keep the company in a highly profitable state for a few more years.

But Steve Jobs underwent a liver transplant last year. Thus, his days are numbered. Is there anyone in line to replace him and his creative thinking? Not likely.

Regarding Treasury Securities, you asked:

“How good are the returns on average?”

A Treasury Security pays exactly what it says it pays. A 5-year Treasury bond paying 4% pays 4% a year for 5 years. No mystery. Guaranteed.

Religion is one of the few great hoxes humans have perpetrated upon themselves.

The Bible — Old Testament and New — is fiction. Maybe some of the writing is enjoyable. But most of it is nutty.

My advice: take the good parts and treat them as a philosophy of life. Meanwhile, ignore the nutty parts, which means ignoring the parts you mentioned as well as the parts that claim there is a god who had a son who walked the Earth.

If necessary, repeat this exercise for Islam. The Koran is another book of fiction.

Well I agree, but the majority of black folks in America are Christian and I was wondering how they reconcile Yahweh’s love of slavery. And how there only way to salvation is through a Jew/white savior.

“Obama IS a former muslim. He was born to a muslim father. According to Islamic tradition, that means he was born a muslim.

He lived in Indonesia — a muslim nation, by law — during his formative years, and while there he attended a muslim school. Since the state religion of Indonesia is Islam, that means he was going to school in an Islamic environment.

No one at ages 8 to 12 escapes the psychological effects of complete immersion in his society. Kids are impressionable. They absorb lunacy without question, as all religions demand.”

Ok, as an INDONESIAN and the NON-MUSLIM son of a MUSLIM, let me clear this up for you. I think I’m qualified to tell you what happens in Indonesia since you clearly don’t know jack about it.

Indonesia is not “a Muslim nation by law”. It is a nation which has a Muslim majority. Islam is NOT enshrined as the state religion; in fact, the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multi-ethnic and multi-faith society.

Obama’s school was not a Muslim school. My (Christian) cousin went there. The Indonesian school system is predominantly secular. Even if did go to a Muslim school, so what? Plenty of non-Catholics go to Catholic schools for various reasons.

Islamic fundamentalism does exist in Indonesia, but it is very much confined to the margins. The average Indonesian is far less defined by his or her religious identity than in most other Muslim-majority countries.

Indonesia is one of the most secular and tolerant Muslim societies in the world. There is no law against changing religion; half of my family are Muslims who have converted to Christianity. Obama’s Indonesian stepfather from all accounts was a Muslim who barely practiced, which is very common in Java.

Most Muslims (apart from the most hardcore) would not begrudge Obama’s conversion to Christianity, particularly because it is well-known that he was never given much instruction in Islamic teachings; neither his father or stepfather were serous about the religion.

I can’t believe I just wasted the last 5 minutes typing that for your benefit, no_slappz, because I know you won’t take heed of anything that doesn’t fit your agenda. But hopefully the other readers here will read this and be better informed to counter the misinformation that gets spread by the likes of you.

I can’t believe I just wasted the last 5 minutes typing that for your benefit, no_slappz, because I know you won’t take heed of anything that doesn’t fit your agenda. But hopefully the other readers here will read this and be better informed to counter the misinformation that gets spread by the likes of you.

Indonesia is not “a Muslim nation by law”. It is a nation which has a Muslim majority. Islam is NOT enshrined as the state religion; in fact, the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multi-ethnic and multi-faith society.

Wait a minute: you mean No_Slappz misinterpreted another country’s history in support of his loony arguments?

“This is an honest question, and one of the reasons I stopped believing in Christianity, how do you reconcile these verses and many many others that condone slavery?”

In Luke 12:46-47, is Jesus talking about servants or slaves? I don’t know the context, but that’s a big distinction.

I guess its about which bits of the Bible you want to take seriously. It’s a big book, with lots of great stuff, and lots of stuff that is frankly ridiculous. I consider myself a Christian in only the loosest sense of the world. Anyone who claims you have to live your life according to absolutely everything in the Bible is deluded. I mean, if you follow it to the letter you are not even allowed to eat shrimps, and have to kill people who dare to work on the Sabbath.

If the Bible is indeed the word of God, it is most certainly the word as filtered through the perspectives of the Hebrew people of the day. So you are going to get some stuff that no longer makes sense given what we now know. Likewise with Islam, it is filtered through the mindset of 6th century Arabia.

So my advice would be not to regard the Bible or any other religious text as the undisputed truth, but look for the basic underlying spirit of it.

It might do you a little good to review the early years of the Suharto regime and the fact that the government itself was a muslim stronghold.

True, Indonesia is not a muslim theocracy. But, as you wrote:

“…the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multi-ethnic and multi-faith society.”

In other words, five religions are officially approved by the state. In the US, there are NO religions with state approval. Therefore, with a population that is 88% muslim — during the years of Obama’s residence — it was a de facto muslim theocracy.

You clearly do not understand the meaning of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Nor does anyone else in Indonesia.

Moreover, recent increases in violence between muslims and Christians in Indonesia shows that trouble has always been brewing.

In other words, five religions are officially approved by the state. In the US, there are NO religions with state approval. Therefore, with a population that is 88% muslim — during the years of Obama’s residence — it was a de facto muslim theocracy.

[Speaking gently to the obviously overwrought No_Slappz]

Son, you’re really reaching. You obviously don’t have a clue as to what “recognized” means in this context, nor do you understand sweet f%*k all about Suharto, who’s extremely bloody reign had nothing at all to do with theocracy and everything to do with your precious CIA, who put and kept him in power.

Indonesia recognizes five religions and is a secular state. This does not mean Indonesia is a theocracy. The United States does indeed recognize religions – far more than five. Try to declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest on your next tax return and see what happens to you. All states have lists of religions which they consider to be legitimate and others which they don’t, including your precious Yew Ess uv Ay. This does not make them theocracies.

Nor does a country having 88% of any one religion make it a theocracy. Both Brazil and the U.S. are around 80% Christian and we are not theocracies.

No_Slappz, if you’re going to hate on Obama, hate away. But if you really want to convince people and not look like a complete conspiracy-minded putz….

Oh, hell, what am I saying?

Y’know, I think you’re right, No_Slappz. I think you need to tell the whole world about how Obama is a Manchurian Candidate for the eeeeevil Muslims. People will really get into this stuff, I’m sure, and it will make you and your fellow travellers look very intelligent and well-informed in the eyes of the world and the American electorate. I also think you need to inform people about how Obama is really the leader of the Bavarian Illuminati. This sort of conspiratorial logic really makes people like you look good and convinces the masses.

You obviously don’t have a clue as to what “recognized” means in this context, nor do you understand sweet f%*k all about Suharto, who’s extremely bloody reign had nothing at all to do with theocracy and everything to do with your precious CIA, who put and kept him in power.

It was the times!

I think it was Obama’s fault that the U.S. lost to Canada in Olympic hockey.

I think it was Thulsa Doom from Conan the Barbarian by Robert E Howard!

Go for it, son! Before the mind control sattelites get you!

You forgot to tell him to stay away from tin foil as it acts as a conductor for mind control!

I know you may have quickly looked up some stuff about Indonesia on Wikipedia, but the Suharto regime was the subject of my thesis. And I’m Indonesian. So the idea of you lecturing me about Indonesian religion and politics is a funny one, but no funnier than you lecturing all the black people here about how backward they are.

“it was a de facto muslim theocracy”

As Thad said, no more than the US, UK or Australia are de facto Christian theocracies. There is no functional sharia court in Indonesia, no ayatollah in charge of determining policy.

Indonesia under Suharto was an authoritarian regime run by people who just happened to be Muslim. Indeed, fundamentalist Islam was actively suppressed in that time, as were many other movements and ideologies. The main form of indoctrination in Indonesia is nationalist, rather than religious.

I know you may have quickly looked up some stuff about Indonesia on Wikipedia, but the Suharto regime was the subject of my thesis. And I’m Indonesian. So the idea of you lecturing me about Indonesian religion and politics is a funny one, but no funnier than you lecturing all the black people here about how backward they are.

What do you expect from a guy like no slapz who thinks the USA never toppled democratic governments?

He obviously doesnt know anything about USA policies in South America where the cia was involved with various toppling of democratic governments in the cold war. Brazil and Chile for starters.

You know, I get fed up with these kind of people bashing Obama. How quickly they forget that the Bush administration tanked the USA like no one has in a long time. They are the ones responsible for leaving our children with less than our parents gave us.And leaving our children with a hate and disgust of America that will take decades to repair.

You know, I really dont care if Obama is muslim, I like him, I like the direction he is trying to take the country.He was handed one of the worst scenarios that a president could be handed and guess what? The USA hasnt tanked under him.

I hate the republicans and tea baggers, they are just closet racists .They leave a bad taste

According to Bible standards, Kidnapping was punishable by death. So the Slave traders were blood guilty.

Among Israelites, slavery only occured when the person got into debt or committed a crime. Even then, they were to be released in 7 years or what was known as the Jubilee year.(every 7 years)

So the Bible has instances of slavery,it by no means condones it, especially as Africans were kidnapped illegally.
Otherwise, God would not have sent Moses to free the Israelites who themselves were slaves under the Egyptians.

Your response shows your total lack of comprehension of the meaning of the First Amendment of the US Consititution.

As I said, the US Consitution recognizes NO religion. NONE. Not one.

But Indonesia’s constitution recognizes FIVE. By the way, I noticed Judaism is not among them. By acknowledging a state preference for those five — with 88% of the population following Islam — you have defined a muslim state.

Meanwhile, the fact that you wrote a paper on the Suharto regime means about as much to me as papers written by people who claim 9/11 was a conspiracy orchestrated by Bush and Cheney.

You might have written a brilliant scholarly paper — or total nonsense. Who knows?

“The United States does indeed recognize religions – far more than five.”

Wrong. The US Constitution recognizes NONE. NOT ONE. ZERO.

You wrote:

“Try to declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest on your next tax return and see what happens to you.”

Again, you show your ignorance. You can declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest if you want. The IRS only snoops into your tax status if you appear to have under-paid what you owe. If you think people who work for religious insitutions are free of tax obligations, you are wildly mistaken.

You wrote:

“All states have lists of religions which they consider to be legitimate and others which they don’t, including your precious Yew Ess uv Ay. ”

If by “states” you mean “countries”, then yes, many states do acknowledge specific religions. But the US does not.

That’s why anyone in the US who wants to form a faith-based organization is free to do so. That’s why — in the US — Scientology is legally equal to Christianity.

“He obviously doesnt know anything about USA policies in South America where the cia was involved with various toppling of democratic governments in the cold war. Brazil and Chile for starters.”

Brazil? You have no idea what you’re stating. Democracy is a relatively new idea in Brazil.

Chile? Hmmm. You seem oblivious to the fact that the nations of South America have been ruled mostly by military strongmen who like to claim they believe in democracy, but actually maintain their power through the control of the military. Everything is murky in South America.

Meanwhile, the one goal the US has when it meddles is the goal of improving the economy of the country in which it is meddling. Democracy and capitalism produce prosperity and peace, which benefits not only the country itself, but the world in general.

@no_ slappz said
Chile? Hmmm. You seem oblivious to the fact that the nations of South America have been ruled mostly by military strongmen who like to claim they believe in democracy, but actually maintain their power through the control of the military. Everything is murky in South America.

In Chile democratically elected leader Salvador Allende was deposed and murdered in a CIA inspired coup and dictator Augusto Pinochet put in his place.

To Nicia
“Among Israelites, slavery only occured when the person got into debt or committed a crime. Even then, they were to be released in 7 years or what was known as the Jubilee year.”

That is a nice thought but that is not what it says in Leviticus. Notice it says you will inherit them for a possession Forever! Not seven years.

Leviticus 25: 45-46

45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOREVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

So basically it is okay to buy slaves that are not Jews.

“According to Bible standards, Kidnapping was punishable by death. So the Slave traders were blood guilty.”

Regardless if kidnapping is punishable by death, buying a slave for life, and beating him or her was not.

Ó Dochartaigh, I too am wondering how some of our fellow commentators – who are normally so absolutist in their moral beliefs (witness Abagond’s recent posts about “It was the times!” or “My family never owned slaves!” for instance) can harmonize said beliefs with their expressed Christian faith.

The Bible is chock-o-block full of appologies for slavery so what do we say to THAT?

I would particularly like to hear from abagond seeing how he was a Marxist Atheist turned Catholic. He said he read the bible and it changed his mind, I would love to hear the verses that changed his mind and why they did so.

“…I too am wondering how some of our fellow commentators – who are normally so absolutist in their moral beliefs (witness Abagond’s recent posts about “It was the times!” or “My family never owned slaves!” for instance) can harmonize said beliefs with their expressed Christian faith.

The Bible is chock-o-block full of appologies for slavery so what do we say to THAT?

I know you directed your comment to Thad, but I’ll add my two cents. Based on my personal experiences it is simply a more diverse country. Due to its segregated history, one drop rules, Jim Crow laws and over simplification of racial prejudice, the U.S. for the longest time listed you as Black or White. In Brazil this was not the case. It is not necessarily a “Black or White” issue. (People are not hung up on it) – just my opinion.

The Bible in Exodus 21:16 clearly states that anyone kidnapping a man and sells him or still has him with him when caught must be put to death.

There’s no record of Israelites specifically going after a certain race of people for the sole purpose of making them into slaves. (unlike the slave traders who fit the bill PERFECTLY)

The Bible also condemns slavery based on RACE alone. Otherwise God would not have brought the plagues on the Egyptians and would have left the Israelites in slavery.

The Bible also notes that if a slave lost and eye or a tooth, they were to be set free through beating from a master.

As well, it’s true that foreigners were slaves but throughout the Bible, the Israelites had been threatened or attacked by them. Imagine you attack an innocent group of people and they conquer you. It would be too dangerous to let you run loose in their camp,especially as you attacked them first…

People as well also sold themselves into slavery to pay off debt, crime etc and it was the Israelites who were set free every 7 years… The slavery under Isralites was more like being a servant. It was not like the brutal slave trade where a slave lasted on average 7 years before dying.

First of all, I was being facetious. Joking aside, this is a common refrain when so-called religious people are asked about such contradictions contained in the Bible. The ones who have a clue, don’t take the Bible as literal in its’ entirety. There are myriad ways of reading and interpreting the Bible, hence all these Christian denominations. If you look at the history of slavery and Christianity, you will notice the changing views, abolitionism is an example of this. Of course the pro-slavery elements are going to use biblical passages to justify slavery, but so did the abolitionist to argue the contrary. It all boils down to belief. Christianity, as with other things such as laws etc, changed, changes, with the times. If you wish to talk about atheists in history and atrocities, how about Stalin and Mao? You can use many things to justify or argue against an abominable act. Ultimately, religiosity or lack thereof is but one of many. Nitpicking over passages in the Bible is one such means of argument. Depending on the person, they will agree or disagree.

Thank you for stating the contradictions in the bible, and apologizing for any form of slavery. “It was the times” right?

“The Bible also condemns slavery based on RACE alone. Otherwise God would not have brought the plagues on the Egyptians and would have left the Israelites in slavery.”

No the bible only condemns slavery for Jews as Leviticus states.

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOREVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Not only was Yahweh condoning slavery he was also Racist about who he wanted enslaved. But I have a funny feeling it wasn’t a God who made up these laws, it was probably a Jewish person.

There’s a massive difference. Until you have lived in Indonesia and actually talked TO people there (rather than AT them), don’t give me this bull about it being an Islamic state. It’s just a joke.

Your comment about Indonesia not recognising Judaism is true, but has nothing to do with anything, frankly.

Aside from that, I give up. There’s no point. Please realise that when people give up on arguing with you, it is nothing to do with your arguments being so intelligent that you win. It’s that there is no point arguing with someone whose mind is so slanted in a certain way that he refuses to see anything that doesnt fit his world view.

“If you wish to talk about atheists in history and atrocities, how about Stalin and Mao?”

A lack of a belief does not make a person do anything, only a belief can do that. Therefore Stalin and Mao were acting on the beliefs of communism or fascism or whatever crazy ideas they had about controlling people. The Buddha was an atheist as well, but it was not atheism that was the cause of his ideas. Only belief can make a person do good or bad things not the lack of.

A lack of a belief does not make a person do anything, only a belief can do that.

Yes, you are right to a certain extent. I believe if I play with nitroglycerin, I could blow my hands off. Do I play with it? No, so in that respect belief in nitroglycerin’s negative effect prevents me from doing so. I believe that I will win the lottery every time I buy tickets, have I won? No, but I keep purchasing them in the belief that I may. I don’t ‘believe’ in going to work but I do. Otherwise I would be eating out of dumpsters, at a mission or sleeping under a bridge, or over a street vent. I go to work out of necessity, not belief. When I say belief or lack thereof, I am not referring to religion only, but other aspects of life. People believe in many things from the mundane to the profound. They may choose to act on something or not, whether belief is there or not.

@ Natasha, leigh and Herneith:
I figured it out a while back, but I have a low tolerance for ignorance. I work as a community educator and can’t help but try and educate the ass of that ass. Maybe I have a saviour complex.
But since lots of other people read this blog, it is kind of important to correct lies and codswallop. Don’t want the impressionable to think that he’s right.

Yes, Eurasian Sensation, you are what is referred to as a decent person. You are absolutely right in regards to answering his ignorance. I have a low tolerance for his obtuseness so choose to reply with tomfoolery. You are right that others read this blog and may think he is right when people choose to not respond to him. He is exasperating though! Are you going to email him your thesis? He left his email address for you! On second thoughts don’t! Email him and curse him out! That’s what I’d do, but he’d probably want to debate the usage of me, the Queen of cursers, curse words, LOL!!!!!

“Your comment about Indonesia not recognising Judaism is true, but has nothing to do with anything, frankly.”

Of course it has a lot to do with the whole business of mixing religion and government. But, as someone from a nation that does exactly that, you cannot grasp one of the most fundamental and defining characteristics of the US:

The Separation of Church and State.

Indonesia, by recognizing five religions in its constitution, makes a clear statement that the Church and the State are NOT separated.

That is not mean Indonesia is a theocratic state like Saudi Arabia. But it does mean the status of religion, specifically Islam, is elevated and has a legal standing that gives it power.

And, as recent events in every muslim country are showing, trouble is brewing.

Indonesia was ruled by Suharto, a rather brutal despot, during the years Obama lived there. At the time — 1967-1971 — Islam was a dominant force that Suharto sought to control.

Meanwhile, as I stated originally, Obama was born to a muslim father. By that fact alone, Obama was a muslim at birth.

He lived in a muslim country from the age of 6 to 10, highly impressionable years for kids. Like all kids, he absorbed the world around him. Hence Islam had a profound effect on him.

After Obama became a practicing Christian, he joined the church headed by Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Wright is a muslim in Christian clothing, as his support for Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam shows. Thus, Obama has stayed close to his muslim roots.

Now Obama is suggesting he will push for the US to reduce its stockpile of nuclear weapons — just when Iran is building its first atomic bombs. Odd timing.

What is your point? Who cares if Obama is a Muslim or not.
Your logic is severely flawed, if he was born to a Muslim father that does not make him Muslim, there is not some genetic trait that makes a person a Muslim. I was born to a Christian family and now I’m an Atheist, but with your logic I would still be a Christian.

There are no Muslim children, Jewish children or Christian children. There are only children, all human beings are born Atheists. The brainwashing comes later.

Oh and I voted 3rd party so don’t think I’m sticking up for Obama, I’m not, I’m just calling out your poor logic.

Who cares? A majority of Americans would care very much IF Obama were STILL a muslim. A small number care that he is a former muslim.

You wrote:

“Your logic is severely flawed, if he was born to a Muslim father that does not make him Muslim…”

Wrong. According to the traditions and practices of Islam, the child of a muslim father is, at birth, a muslim. If you thought about this for a moment you would see that it’s obviously the case.

You wrote:

“…there is not some genetic trait that makes a person a Muslim.”

True. But no one suggested that.

You wrote:

“I was born to a Christian family and now I’m an Atheist, but with your logic I would still be a Christian.”

Undoubtedly you were baptized as a Christian, which means you and your parents participated in a Christian ritual that brings a new-born into the fold. Obviously the day arrives when you can renounce your role as a Christian.

You wrote:

“There are no Muslim children, Jewish children or Christian children.”

There’s plenty of evidence of Jewish genes.

You wrote:

“There are only children, all human beings are born Atheists. The brainwashing comes later.”

For the most part, you have confused religious inter-generational practices with religious indoctrination.

One’s religious status at birth is very much like one’s citizenship at birth. It is the custom, if not the law, of the land for children to be citizens of the nation of which their parents are citizens.

Oh and I voted 3rd party so don’t think I’m sticking up for Obama, I’m not, I’m just calling out your poor logic.

“You`re nuts and you`re making a sophmoric argument baased on stupid sophisms.”

Apparently you are truly baffled by religious practices regarding that status of new-borns.

You wrote:

“Whatever Islamic law might say about Obama, Obama BY AMERICAN LAW is not Islamic unless HE SAYS SO.”

AMERICAN LAW is silent on the subject of one’s religion. Meanwhile, children have limited rights when it comes to declaring their acceptance or rejection of religion. Parents are empowered to force and coerce them into following any faith.

True, but you can be born Black, Asian, or a Gentile Caucasian of any religion, be adopted by Jewish parents raised a Jew and be considered a Jew.

Children of Jewish fathers but not raised in the Jewish religion (such as myself..) are generally not considered Jewish.

It would appear that Obama Sr. walked away from Islam even before he got to the US. From everything I have read about Obama and his family, if you absolutely want to pin a creed on him that came from his family it would be some variant of Socialism. As for hm being Muslim.. so far no whippings or beheadings in the Rose garden… which might actually liven things up in the political sphere.

“Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These Oriental-majority cities are populated by high IQ people and recovered from nuclear attacks. But Detroit never recovered from getting blacks. Think about it. A city is better of getting bombed with nuclear bombs than getting blacks. Scary, racist thought, but is it factually false?”

Just a word of warning: once No Slappz makes up his mind about something there is no reasoning with him. You will not be able to persuade him that that he is wrong about Obama being Muslim. You are wasting your words and letting him derail the thread.

“True, but you can be born Black, Asian, or a Gentile Caucasian of any religion, be adopted by Jewish parents raised a Jew and be considered a Jew. ”

You are now officially mincing words. In fact, anyone can convert to Judaism. That was not my point.

You wrote:

“Children of Jewish fathers but not raised in the Jewish religion (such as myself..) are generally not considered Jewish. ”

True. But the children of Jewish mothers are identified as Jews until they embrace another faith. Just as the children of muslim fathers are identified as muslims. However, for many muslims, leaving the faith is a trickier business.

You wrote:

“It would appear that Obama Sr. walked away from Islam even before he got to the US.”

Nevertheless, at birth, Obama was a muslim, and from the ages of 6 to 10 he lived in a muslim country. Thus, his earliest religious identity was as a muslim.

You wrote:

“From everything I have read about Obama and his family, if you absolutely want to pin a creed on him that came from his family it would be some variant of Socialism.”

Yes, his life experience has undoubtedly resulted in an embrace of Socialism.

You wrote:

“As for hm being Muslim.. so far no whippings or beheadings in the Rose garden… which might actually liven things up in the political sphere.”

Today, Obama is nominally a Christian.

Meanwhile, my original point boiled down to the fact that from the ages of about 5 to 12, children are highly impressionable and do NOT have the ability to stop themselves from becoming immersed in and deeply influenced by their surroundings.

With respect to whippings and beheadings, well, Obama has neglected to mention his opposition to these barbaric practices that are weekly events in Riyadh and other cities in the muslim world. In his case, his reticence comes across as tacit acceptance.

“Do you really think things would be different if McCain were in office? Historically, he voted more “liberally’ than Obama.”

My original concern following Obama’s election was the seeming power resulting from a Democratic White House and a Democratic majority in Congress. Initially I expected Obama to enjoy near dictatorial powers.

However, I have been pleasantly surprised by the turn of events. More members of Congress than I would have estimated have recognized his ignorance of economics and financial reality.

Unfortunately, he has managed to saddle the US with too much government spending which will require major tax increases sooner rather than later. He will have to jack up taxes before the end of his first term, and that will — hopefully — kill his chances for re-election.

Meanwhile, when I envisioned a McCain presidency, I expected him, as a Republican president, to be in constant war with a Democratic Congress, leading to a series of stalemates inflicting little or no damage on the economy.

Gridlock in Washington is good news for the economy.

You wrote:

“As for my “honest” political views: We’re all victims of the Matrix. (If you haven’t seen the trilogy, watch it. It speaks volumes philosophically.)”

Scientology, the Bible and The Matrix — proof that humans are more gullible than lemmings.

Al-Tadarruj wa al-Tawazun (Gradual, Balanced and Proportional) The progressiveness and the expansiveness of the da’wah movement of the party must be done gradually and proportionally, in accordance to the law of Allah (Sunnatullah) that governs the universe.

The system of Islam stands on the principles of gradualism and balance. These principles are natural and will not be subjected to changes. Human beings by nature are created in graduation and balance. Therefore, all human acts, especially political acts, which are aimed at deviation from gradualism and balance, will lead to failure and, hence, they can be categorized as a crime towards humanity and the nature.

Consequently, gradualism and balance have to underlie each and every activity of the Party, both in terms of its individual activists and its collective organization.

11. Al-‘Alamiyah (Part of Global Da’wah) In principle, any Islamic da’wah movement must have a global vision in parallel to the universality of Islam.

This, indeed, has been the very nature of the da’wah. It is an activity that is not limited to certain ethnics, or by state or regional boundaries. This recognition highlights that the existence of our da’wah is part of the da’wah activities around the globe.

It is, therefore, essential that every policy made, program planned and step taken is in harmony with the international da’wah strategy and follows the sunnatudda’wah whilst not setting aside specific issues happening locally.

Da’wah, for the uninitiated, word “Da’wah” in Arabic means to invite. When it is used in conjunction with Islam it is understood to mean “inviting to the Way of submission and surrender to Allah.”

Not sure you understood my analogy with the Matrix. It touches on so many issues that philosphers have dealt with through the ages.

You get choice, free will, desitiny, fate, etc… Contradictory, right? How can you have free will and fate at the same time.

How can you be free and imprisoned at the same time?

What is your definition of Freedom? Free to make choices? What choices? Even if you are free to choose, your choices are based on limitations. Limitation that are IMPOSED by Society, the law, the economy, Global Trade, etc….

Is it your choice, or the illusion of choice? Yeah, your free, but to what degree?

The Matrix series is a Hollywood version of some philosophical excursion. In other words, fantasy.

Bottom line — whatever your version of “freedom” happens to be, there is a place in the world where you can realize it. Thus, there’s no point in dreaming about the boundaries of freedom, unless doing the dreaming is your idea of freedom.

As far as limitations go, in the US and a number of other countries, limitations are self-imposed.

JAKARTA, Indonesia – Scores of Islamic students staged protests outside Jakarta’s parliament and in at least three other major Indonesian cities on Friday against President Barack Obama’s upcoming visit to this predominantly Muslim country.

The students carried banners branding Obama as an enemy of Islam and an imperialist in downtown Jakarta as well as in the provincial capitals Padang, Yogyakarta and Surabaya.

They also threw shoes at large pictures of Obama’s head. An Iraqi journalist was sentenced to a year in prison for throwing his shoes at U.S. President George W. Bush during a news conference in Baghdad in 2008.

Protest organizer Ahmad Irhamul Fikri, spokesman for the Coordinating Board for Campus Proselytizing Institute, said bigger rallies will be staged next Friday in more Indonesian cities ahead of Obama’s March 20-22 visit.

Such demonstrations of hostility toward Obama are rare in Indonesia, where he enjoys widespread popularity because he spend part of his childhood in Jakarta while his mother was married to his Indonesian stepfather.

Local government officials allowed business people to erect a statue of a 10-year-old Obama in a Jakarta park in December. But it was shifted last month to a nearby elementary school that he attended after more than 50,000 people supported a Facebook campaign against it and court action was threatened.

Re: Sweden, point take about Sweden’s involvement in slave trade. I was not previously aware of it. As for Finland.. I guess that raises the question what responsibility would a conquered people have in regards to the behavior of their masters…? Did the Filipinos profit from the Spaniards slavery because they were controlled by the Spanish empire during the time of the trans Atlantic slave trade…? I would suspect the answer would be no.

Hey guys I’m back! Did you miss me?
I see the toolish troll no_slappz is still chatting c***!
I also see that Uncle Milton is back. At least when he disagrees with Abagond he uses logical comments and backs it up with some evidence unlike no_slappz!

As to the question “how white america got rich”
It’s a combination of many things! Ultimately, wealth has always been spread around the world
Now The U.S.A. is the top dog for wealth.
a century or 2 ago it was us Brits.
Persia, China, The Arab world (Including Babylon and Mesopotamia) have all been top dogs for wealth as well etc.
Soon enough China will be top dog for wealth. After that who bloody knows!

I suggest that you read “White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain’s White Slaves in America” 2008, NYU Press by Don Kirkland and Michael Walsh. This book will lighten your perspective on windfalls while giving a bit more informed explanation as to how a lot of white people ended up in America. I also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the nasty, paycheck to paycheck (i.e. masters giving slaves not wages but slave expenses) labor that whites have done in places like America’s steel mills and coal mines, etc. There’s a little thing known as the white working class that’s been propping up the miniscule American elite class since day one. Do you really see it as a privilege to do that work? Well then, be my guest.

What a shame it is to see another person cop to the divide and conquer tactics of the tiny percentage of ruling elites. Now listen carefully, if we start viewing people based on economic class instead of on race, golly, we might actually be able to come together and topple those motherfuckers right off of their gilded shitters. You know what I mean? But no, it’s cats like you that have to go around stirring up the race hate. Face it asshole. You hate white people more than you claim they hate you, and that hate penetrates so deep that you know the truth but prefer to ignore it because it so conveniently panders to that hate. Come on. Admit it. You know it’s true. Even if the media and academia hadn’t been slanting your perception, brainwashing you since the day you were born, you’d still be jealous of, I mean hate white people.

Be careful, Tim: GWM might just start reciting the old saw that the jews are a parasitic race which takes over Aryan-formed civilizations.

Folks, this “Whites created civilization” viewpoint was first launched by Arthur Gobineau back in the mid-19th century and was further refined by Galton, the father of eugenics. The concept had no scientific basis then and it has none now. It was most family put to political work by A. Hitler in the 1930s and ’40s.

The only thing interesting about GWM’s rhetoric is how it re-warms the old notion of Aryan supremacy. GWM’s marginally smart enough not to spout that sosrt of trash, but it’s essentially the same deal.

Boil it down to its particulars, Aryanism and GWM’s view are the same: all that is good in human civilization was built by one race and one race only and that race is now in danger of losing its “special” proclivities due to being overwhelmed by its inferiors.

Read Madison Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race, the book Hitler declared to be “my Bible”, and you’ll find GWM’s opinions in an unadorned nutshell.

Mira is right, maybe it has to do with sexual aggression,love-hate thing. Ive had the misfortune of running into a lot of them on YouTube. That or they hate black men but not black women… Same goes for white women, and other ethnicities as well…

B. R.
im sorry but your incorrect
if a white man and a black man apply for the same job.
the job will go to who ever is better equiped to do the job.
there are laws against not hiring someone because of color or religion.

in many cases blacks will get hired before a white man because the individual doing the hiring doesnt want to be accused of being racist. and that is a fact.

studies also show that black woman have more purchasing power then white woman

Studies have shown that a job applicant is significantly more likely to get called to an interview if he/she has a name that sounds white.
An applicant with a identifiably black name (ie. DeWayne, etc) is less likely to get an interview even if they have the exact same resume. The same goes for people with Muslim names, Asian names, etc etc.

I would say this post is about 90 percent accurate, but once again, Abagond, please read MORE history, and you’ll have a better argument.
First off, it’s a common mistake to see “white people” as a monolithic power-wielding group — and also to assume every white immigrant came here of their own volition. Millions of whites were actually indentured servants, or, especially in the case of the Irish, slaves or virtual slaves. One of the reasons Africa was chosen as a source of slave labor was because it was easier to catch blacks who ran away than whites because whites could blend into the general population. Hence, over time, black slavery supplanted white slavery (and Indian slavery) in the “New World.”

Secondly, most property-less whites did not have the right to vote when the country began, and universal white male suffrage only happened in the early 19th century, followed ostensibly by universal black male suffrage after the Civil War which was quickly derailed after Union troops were withdrawn from the South. Of course, most of us know the history of suffrage of women and African-Americans after that.

It is completely true that blacks were economically shut out of the American pie, so to speak, although, ironically, their incomes were rising up until Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society actually set in motion forces that set back black advancement. Yes, affirmative action benefited SOME blacks economically and socially, but the welfare system destroyed black family life by punishing African-American familes which remained intact with fathers and rewarding single motherhood. It’s an unintentional error of the system that is only just beginning to be rectified. Had welfare been designed to reward poor people for moving up the ladder, and not merely throwing them a bone when they are at the bottom, it could have radically altered the course of urban black America in the 1970s and 80s, not to mention rural white America, which is STILL the primary recipient of welfare.

Unlike most whites, I support economic reparations for the black community to make up for segregated housing policies and others that have destroyed black economic well being. However, I also believe that until the African-American community repudiates the criminal element too many pop stars and others celebrate, any economic investment could actually backfire. White non-Protestant immigrant groups like the Irish and Italians only gained a secure foothold in America when they began buying land and valuing literacy. It is sad that our government actually worked AGAINST blacks doing so for decades, but that has changed and the time is now for African-Americans to make a concerted effort to organize and educate themselves in order to avail themselves of the legally protected rights that were secured for them in the Civil Rights era.

“Unlike most whites, I support economic reparations for the black community to make up for segregated housing policies and others that have destroyed black economic well being. However, I also believe that until the African-American community repudiates the criminal element too many pop stars and others celebrate, any economic investment could actually backfire. “

I assure you that most Blacks DO repudiate the criminal elements. But just as Whites can’t control the louder voices of Charlie Sheen, Kid Rock, or Eminem, Blacks can’t control the celebrities who love to embrace gangsterism. The average Black person doesn’t have much of an opportunity where his/her views are made known.

“There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls.”

It’s interesting that you mention Japan, which at the end of the 20th century stood as the world’s 2nd largest economy without having enjoyed any of the 3 windfalls to which you attribute America’s wealth.

Speaking of those windfalls, the third:

“Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans.”

The infusion of money from Britain went in large part to the American industrial sector, specifically the Northeast. Those were jobs available to black workers, especially when America entered the war and the draft cleared the labour pool. I suspect they usually weren’t paid, promoted or treated as well as white workers, but nonetheless a lot of African-Americans bought their first houses with their salary from the assembly line. Black America got a larger share of that wealth than any previous infusion.

I think a sober step back reveals a lot missing from the picture you’ve painted. America became a rich and powerful nation on the backs of African slaves, but that’s not the story of the 20th century. Nor is it the simple transfer of colonial wealth from the British Empire to the American.

The spectacular wealth generated by America in the last century was created by the greatest minds on the planet working in a surprisingly free country. America is rich because Americans invented the assembly line, the airplane, the computer and the internet, not to mention revenue generating monsters like Hollywood, Wall Street (well, most of the time) and the entire goddamn fast food industry. Oh, and Walmart and Exxon-Mobil. THAT’S how white America got rich.

I’m white and not rich. I have a full-time job but live in a studio rental and don’t even own a car. Please tell me where I can get my money.
Is there a white bank account that I don’t know about? And can I get a credit card for that account? Or am I supposed to somehow get my money from non-whites? Again, please tell me because it wasn’t clear in your post.

Well, obviously my post was a little joke. But the whole post above is a bit of a joke too. There is no big pile of gold that is controlled by and for white people. Fortunes are lost as quick as they come and the notion that rich white people somehow give their money to other white people is questionable. The biggest gift I’m aware off is the one from Bill Gates and Warren Buffet who donate their entire fortune to charity, mostly for health causes in Africa and to improve education for poor people in the US.

Anyway, just look at the Forbes list of richest people in the US. There is no old money there. In fact, the oldest fortune in the top 10 is from the Walton empire and that was started in the 50’s. Simply put, the richest people in the US earned it by being smarter, faster and probably more ruthless then the next guy.

Now, there is no denying that the richest people are virtually all white males and I’m 100% sure many white males get a head start in life probably something to do with a culture of education, intellectual competitiveness, emphasis on manners and adapting to the environment. I’m also a 100% sure that if you’re an aspiring black entrepreneur you’ll have more obstacles to overcome and more ignorant people to convince and that is unfair and unfortunate. However, that is not the same as as a conspiracy theory of whites keeping their claws on their “white” gold for the last couple of hundred years.

Bobby, it’s not a case of most Blacks believing that it’s *impossible* to succeed, or that being White alone is a guaranteed ride to Fort Knox. But have a look again at what Abagond’s points from a slightly different perspective.

Labor: Whites have had, and continue to have much better access to great jobs simply because most of the people who have great jobs are already White. Often, people don’t even realize that they’re being exclusive. But when you ask if anyone knows of someone who would make a good receptionist, summer intern, or part-time assistant (to a room full of mostly White employees) this query, is most likely going to get you more White people referred, simply because that’s who other White people mostly know. Multiply that several thousands of times on every level, and you begin to see one small example of how it is much easier as a White person to get a job.

Money: If you and your family are more likely to have the inside line of getting better jobs, then you will also tend to make more money (sometimes dramatically so). Which means that you have a much better shot at being ready for and being able to afford, a good education, which again puts you on top. You are also more likely to be a homeowner, which means that you have greater means of financing large costs against real collateral and that your housing costs have a tendency not to go up nearly as quickly as renters. This too is a great advantage.

Land: And, of course, if your parents owned their home (much more probable with Whites than with Blacks) then at some point they may leave the home to their children. Many times, White middle-agers benefit from six figure inheritances, based on the sale of a house that their parents bought when they were children. Blacks (who own homes at a much lower rate, and often on less valuable properties) inherit large sums less frequently.

And of course, if your parents are accustomed to managing, investing and saving money, then you will have a huge advantage as those skills are passed down to you. However, if your parents financial expertise is in making ends meet on relatively low income then they may know well how to survive when poor, but may have little to pass on about how to become rich and stay rich. but all of these patterns reach back to hundreds of years of injustice that set the pattern. i think that is what Abagond is getting at.

No, that is not what I am getting at. I am saying they got rich from the barrel of a gun – pointed at Native Americans to take their land, pointed at blacks to take their labour and pointed at some others too.

This post is not about race and social mobility and saving pennies. It is about race and violence and history.

Inregards to Disney/TV affecting most christians world view; as much as people can be affected by their religions…..nowadays when people say “thats what religion I am” pretty much what they really mean is “thats the church I don’t go to”.

And considering how much hours of television watch and the attempts at being multicultural/inclusive…..I could see TV having an affect on what people belief, most people base their view point “touched by an Angel” more than on the Bible these days.

For upword mobility of black people; aren’t something like 90% of black immigrants successful, I think they are supposed to be highly educated but still. That does seem to imply that if you desire to achieve it can be done, I mean it may suck to be getting paid 60-70 thousand when whites in similiar positions might be getting paid a 100thousand but its still got to be better than getting paid 15 or 30 thousand.

As for why not as many African-Americans pursue these avenues; could it be cultural…..like one of the things I here is that initially many of the black college applicants when they start out in college are at a lower level of IQ but by the end of it test out as either comparable or superior to others…so is it possible negative influences from family, friends etc….are contributing to an anti-intellectual atmosphere?

As for why Africans don’t have wealth; well alot of its been stolen over the years and transfered to various other countries but one thing I recall hearing about was how there was at least one country that due to various aspects we set up in dealings etc….over the years that we get something like 70% of their yearly income. Don’t know if thats true or even which country that was but its something to think about.

White people and racism, I think most of the time they don’t try to justify things via the various thoughts as posted here inregards to natives etc….honestly most of the time I don’t think they actually think that much about life in general, they just watch tv, go to work, eat at burger king and enjoy themselves. Most people are too self-focused to either no or worry about someone elses pain or suffering.

That said when confronted with these issues; what they’ve been told over the years, plus whatever issues with racism they have plus wanting not to feel bad all do contribute to their argument. That and just mind blowing amounts of ignorance.

One of the things mentioned ealier was race vs class and moving up; I think part of the reason people don’t fight class as much is because they all have hopes of moving up and getting rich, so fingers crossed in the long run doing something that goes against the higher class and rich goes against their own potential interests. Of course considering how often things being directed against the lower class have pretty much a non-beniegn affected on minorities as a whole kind of make that a paradoxical hope to have but there you go.

Can women who date black women be racists? Yes; interestingly enough I believe that studies have been done that indicate overweight women are more likely to be racist than moderate or underweight women. But it seems like the more overweight low class sorts are who alot of the black men go out with. If I had to guestimate I would say its their own low self esteem making them aim for lower in the thought it increases their odds when in reality going for the better looking women probably increases their odds.

As for welfare “ironically” punishing the poor, why do you assume it wasn’t intended to do that? If your rich, the last thing you want is more potential competition challenging you for your hard earning wealth and resources, that and republicans pretty much have a 24/7 hatefest on the poor, they don’t want them to achieve upward mobility, they want them to stay poor and work for them.

One more thought about why white people might deny racism or privileges; egotism.

If you are racist; than admitting that white people have privileges means having to entertain the thought that if black people do comparable to you or even remotely close means they have to be at “least” equal and quite possibly superior in those situations.

That and it also means that despite having white male privilege that you haven’t done all that much in your life with all those advantages…..kind of a blow to the ego there.

Its bad enough to do poorly in life, its even worse to do so when you realize you have a leg up on everybody else.

[…] Until then whites will continue to be screwed up and remain racist because deep down they know their lives are a fraud. Racism lives on, continuing to damage the lives of people of colour, because it is a morphine drip […]

You gotta realize fast that nothing is going to change by writing an article, start finding a more practicle way that really is going to change something in reality. You can shout all you want and you can be very angry , but that is not going to matter even a bit. I am not White and I am not Black either….. This world needs a real hard soul breaking punch, not a classroom lesson. The question left is only whether you can make that punch… I love your article thanks…….

why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot.

Don’t get me wrong I understand your stance and I mostly agree with it but this segment is wrong. The narrative is that white people moved from Europe because (for instance) the Monarchy was inhibiting the righteous path of Hard Work -> Good Wealth. It’s part of the narrative of WHY America is so special because it IS a place where you can work hard and reap rewards.

Quit your lying. The original immigrants from Europe were thieves, rapists, religious fanatics and other assorted arseholes. Obviously, you have been feed a load of bullocks! Make no mistake, you are still a part of the British Empire but are too dumb to know it. I guess being stupid is part and parcel with being inherently criminal as your ancestors were.

Brilliant! Reality is a little more nuanced and complex, but you are after all a computer scientist/engineer. Nevertheless, I am really learning from your writings (I am a predominantly Southern European from Guatemala). Keep the good work, speaking the truth, and helping the world.

people come on !blacks whites all the same! I know they were bad in the past but are you sure they are still like that? look I have brown south american skin so i might not take this as people with beautiful black skin or delicate white skin.But lets face it that was the past!

White American wealth is still being enjoyed in the present…
Yes..but mostly by top 5% of US Whites and some Elite Chinese and Asian Indians, predominantly through the issuance of debt imposed upon future generations.

Thanks to federal programs, Jim Crow and discriminatory acts, like the Naturalization Act in 1790 and the Wagner Act in 1835, White people have been able to further the wealth gap.

Public policy decisions allowed Whites to be given access to property, title, and wealth. Every White person knows that one of the biggest ways to attain wealth is home ownership.

Here’s some history on how Whites widened the wealth gap:

After the Supreme Court declared racially-based housing ordinances unconstitutional in 1917, some residential neighborhoods enacted covenants requiring White property owners to agree not to sell to Blacks. In 1910, Los Angeles, which is where I live, had the highest percentage of Black home ownership in the nation, with more than 36 percent of the city’s African-American residents owning their own homes (Blacks in L.A. only numbered at 2,100 at the time). However, that changed in the 1920s when restrictive covenants that enforced residential segregation became widespread. Mind you that by 1920 the Black population in L.A. grew to approximately 15,000. Before World War II African-Americans in L.A. were mostly confined along the south central corridor, Watts, and small enclaves in Venice, Santa Monica and Pacoima (in the San Fernando Valley), which received far fewer services than other areas of the city. After the second World War, L.A.’s Black population grew from 63,774 in 1940 to 170,000 a decade later as many continued to migrate from the segregated South for better opportunities. Still, Blacks in L.A. remained in segregated enclaves. The Supreme Court banned the legal enforcement of race-oriented restrictive covenants in the Shelly v. Kraemer case in 1948, which, by the middle 1950s, allowed middle-class Black families to move westward to predominantly White areas, like the Crenshaw District, Baldwin Hills and the Midtown District. Black home ownership in L.A. declined severely during this period.

By the middle of the 20th century African-Americans were renting homes throughout urban America. Why were Blacks renting? Federal policies known as “redlining” prevented Black families from getting real mortgages. Most of the mortgages went to suburbanizing America. Homes in White communities were of high value, which caused the net worth of White families to grow. The housing market that opened in the 1950s and 1960s in urban areas was largely a rental market. By paying rent a person does NOT gain equity. Many White families held their wealth in home equity, which allowed them to finance their children’s education and save up for retirement. Blacks were forced to buy high-interest houses on contracts from real estate speculators simply because they could not get conventional or RFA mortgages. The contracts were a scam. If a Black person missed a payment the real estate speculator could take his home. No lawyer could help him. Black bought homes that doubled or tripled their value price. In Chicago’s North Lawndale, the scam of contracts caused Blacks to create the Contract Buyers League (CBL). They would not make payments by striking against the real estate speculators. After a yearlong struggle, the payment strike came to an end. 106 out of 552 families successfully renegotiated and gained ownership of their homes. Many others lost their homes and left North Lawndale. The CBL hoped to set a nationwide precedent for fair housing. They filed federal lawsuits claiming discrimination. After years in court, they lost both federal lawsuits.

As recently as 2014, 86% of suburban whites live in neighborhoods with a Black population of less than 1%. The well-educated Black middle class does exist, so nobody can’t blame this residential segregation that exists in White suburbia on “ignorant and ratchet” Black folks.

They’re white, so they are racist, is basically what the last half had screamed, ruining what was a good start into a personal, whiney bitch session.

The following quotes of this writing are EXACTLY synonymous with the racism the writer is supposedly apart from.

“It appeals to their white pride (which they deny they have);
It fits their racist picture of the world (which they think is just seeing the world as it is)”

Any idea how ridiculously derelict that makes you sound?
These comments are especially indicative of the same thought processes that fuel racial hatred and organizations as the klan and the SS

Way to set back your own argument
Want to change things? Quit bitching about the past, all of which you referenced happening outside your lifetime by the way, and do something to improve the future.
You’re not going to end race hate or preference by contributing more to it.
Instead of patching a hole in this sinking boat of society, you would seem to rather ride around in it on a jackhammer.

“Whites want to benefit from their ugly past – and their less ugly present – but they do not want to face up to it and set things right.”

(rough paraphrase from the comments from an ‘Open Letter To Uriel’) “Maybe when whites undo racism, they might be forgiven.”

This is exactly what I mean when I say “You want to doom whites to be evil.”. Setting things right would mean being punished for matters out of your control.

If it is fee-fees to see me not as a paroled sex offender, and I should pay for my ancestor’s misdeeds by throwing away my life (as in do nothing but basic sustainence/ sj work, accept people have a right to always hate your guts, and use only things from the worst culture[s] currently in existence) and giving it to poc (for instance), then why would anyone wanna own privileged history?

Why is it considered legitimately painful to actually give me humanity, slack, and good faith? If I can’t control a certain misdeed (benefiting from privilege) to the point of removing it, why should I be constantly chastized for being unable to do so?

“The right thing to do would be to give [the money, i.e. your undeserving resources and benefits] back.”

It’s not that easy, as I mentioned above. Yet why must I doomed to only being liked by a fraction of the world to be even seen as benign. Saying I should suffer because others do is like saying if I break my leg, I shouldn’t go to the hospital because others lose all their limbs and are mistreated by the staff.

Most poc who like white people are brainwashed or awful in some other capacity, most whites who can stand me are

If you had 300+ friends beyond your family, and those people were literally all just Manson “Family” members, then you are not liked. You’d be powerful, but nobody is an island, and you die as a monster for associating with them.

Reparations would not mean putting in place a penitential cult. It would mean putting in place policies that would help to equalize wealth between races.

Most of the present racial wealth gap comes from past and present racist policies, like the Homestead Act, the G.I. Bill and predatory loans.

If you look at how rich the US is and how wealth is distributed, you will find that no one will have to take a vow of poverty to set it right. Hardly. To the contrary, millions will be lifted out of poverty. Done right, most ordinary Whites (the bottom 80%, say) would also benefit. They too have been ripped off (though not as much).

“Done right, most ordinary Whites (the bottom 80%, say) would also benefit. They too have been ripped off (though not as much).”

Some of that comes from classism (read Lord of Mirkwood’s rants), but much of it comes from White racism: the Republican’s Southern Strategy. It is running out of demographic steam. Trump may be its last (desperate) hurrah. But in its glory days (1968-2004), it persuaded many working and middle class Whites to vote AGAINST their class interests, like tax cuts for the rich and huge handouts to the oil, agribusiness and defence industries.

“Ugh trump is acting like a 4th grader, making fun of a disabled reporter, jeb seems done, ah jesus please dont let it be hillary”

.

@ v8driver

The most honest recent prez the US had was Carter.

The prez the current US is the most deserving of – after Obama – is probably Hillary.

Actually, at this point it’s irrelevant who the prez is. Whomever is (s)elected will dutifully do the bidding of the powers hidden in the shadows.

When the Clintons walked away scot free from their plethora of crimes committed while they occupied the Oval Office (none of which had anything to do with Monica Lewinsky) the First Couple set the tone and raised the bar for a new out in the open, in your face corruption that fat, lazy and stupid Amerikans shrugged their shoulders and benignly accepted. Then came Bush and his pals to usher the US into a period of non-stop wars, but I digress..

The legacy the Clintons firmly established was – the well heeled and connected elitists are well above and beyond the reach of the Law. The only politician or bankster or CEO that goes to prison are those who have thoroughly pissed off someone ABOVE them in the food chain.

“You and I seem to want the same thing and believe the same things, so why do you hate Bernie?”

.

I don’t hate anyone.
I’m just not that naive to believe that THE MACHINE will allow anyone to reach the White House who isn’t going to play real nice for THEIR team. Period. There may be small or slight differences between the puppets, but the bottom line is, they’re gonna play!

And for the record: The day you and I believe the same things is probably the day I enter my grave! 😉

This is complete reverse racism. If anything you said were true, Rome would still be going and the most wealthy people would be Romans. Rimes empire enslaved more than 20,000,000 humans (regardless of color, religion, creed).

Less than 3% of the south owned multiple slaves. Those huge plantations and the men that made money off of those slaves went broke after the civil war.

You need to do some real UNBIASED research. You have to let go of your hatred for other races, especially (very obvious) your hatred and racism towards white Americans. Many black Americans have WORKED and EARNED a great living in America.

What people are calling “white privileges” are nothing more than humans that worked harder, that brushed off being made fun of, that pushed through belittlement and sarcasm. That put in 18-20 hours a day, 7 days a week, lived in poverty, and walked to work for 10 years to “make it”. I’ve seen blacks do the same and get the same results.

If you sit around getting high, drinking, getting a monthly government handout, you are doing nothing to better yourself. You have too much time on your hands and then get in trouble for your own decisions, then try to blame someone else…..I tried that for 4 years……it didn’t get me anywhere but jail. Then I put in work…..saved money, worked 2 full time jobs, wife worked a full time and part time all while raising 2 kids. We shared a POS car that barely got us place to place. I slept 4 hours a day on a good day. I ate when I could. I SACRIFICED and put up with negativity from all directions. But I kept my nose to the grindstone and kept working. Was I tired? Yes Was I worn out? Hell yes Did I enjoy it? No way. Did I get upset when I saw others with more even though they didn’t put in work? No…I was thankful for what I had and kept telling myself I would one day have that.

It’s about doing it. Not asking for someone else to pay your way. It’s about sacrifice.

You know you are the type to blame others but not get off your ass and put in a good 90 hour work week…..week in and week out. You just want something for nothing. So you blame others for your downfalls.

My life turned around when I got out of jail and told myself…”only I am responsible for what I did. Those so called friends didn’t make me do it, I DID IT”. I took responsibility for my own actions. I told myself, “no one is going to give me anything, if I want something, I HAVE To work hard, honest, and legally to build my own legacy.”

“I took responsibility for my own actions. I told myself, “no one is going to give me anything, if I want something, I HAVE To work hard, honest, and legally to build my own legacy.”

I commend you for taking responsibility for your actions and life.

Your ignorance about Black Americans, our history and current conditions is appalling. Your definition of White privilege shows that you have absolutely not idea of how Black people also worked hard and sacrificed——and had nothing to show for it at the end of their lives because of a system that worked against them instead of for them.

For example, millions of Black homeowners were swindled out of their homes because of subprime mortgages. Even when they had jobs and good credit, the only loans they could find were full of tricks and traps. White homeowners with similar job histories and credit were offered legitimate loans.

The community group, ACORN worked for years to sound the alarm about predatory lending and its outcomes. They were targeted and silenced with a scandal using doctored video.

Black America lost over half its collective wealth due to criminal behavior on the part of White owned banks and lending institutions. To this day, not one White bank executive has done any jail time for their crimes.

Instead, Black people have to hear countless lectures from know nothing White people like you who think they are qualified to tell Black people to “take responsibility”.

When will White people take responsibility for their crimes against Black people?

When will you take responsibility for educating yourself about the reality of this country?

Map of colonial world. European after they used the knowledge and sciences invented by other civilizations, to invade the world searching for a way out of their poverty. They killed other nations and steal their resources while raising the Cross and claim they invade to spread Jesus words, funny?. That is how they become rich, they used science criminally. That is why some of them defend their bloody history by telling ” we are rich because we are more intelligent”..

[…] Reading more than the conservative press makes whites an open target – that should help them become familiar with the landscape: How did White America become so rich? Those hard-working, pull-themselves-up-by-their-bootstraps Whi… […]

You apparently miss the real point. People have been using racial color, status, origin, historical remembrances and much more for millennia in order to accomplish certain things. 1. Wealth by first establishing disparity. 2. Power by establishing wealth… or by violence… our both. This has been practiced for so long, it is a norm… by more than just whites or Americans. At the same time, many people have worked very hard to simply survive.

The real point is not found in identifying groups of people and speaking of them by generalized group labels. That process has been used in order to gain the support of masses in the creation of disparity then used against those very masses. It’s called demonization. Once a group is demonized by looking for and identifying justification to regard them as “less than” or “non-humsn”, it then has been made okay to talk nasty about them, disenfranchise them, steal from them (by legal or illegal means) and historically even to enslave and kill them.

This process is behavior that INDIVIDUALS choose or do not choose. There are no “whites”…no “Americans”…just people. Those people choose to dish out such deleterious behavior…or become impoverished or oppressed by the decisions of other “individual” people. True, people band together and exercise poor behavior together for their vested interests… and people band together to fight against it. Both sides of that equation contribute to global disparity and unrest… and war. Just remember… each brick in the walls that divide us…that single brick is a single individual and their choices… not the group they form and seem to be. Don’t hide in the “good” group and point at the “bad” group. Just take stock and make your own choices good ones.

Making angry-sounding claims about groups of people, even when evidence says those claims are mostly true, is contributing to the emotional drive engine that perpetuates the disparity by keeping people emotionally locked into their side of the conflict, often believing they are “right”. It emphasizes a victim/perpetrator syndrome-oriented ideology and internalized mentality.

I was born in a land called America… but I’m not an American. I was born rather pink… often called white… but I’m not a “white”. It appears that in addition to my English, Irish and Scottish ancestry, I also have ancestors who were natives of the land now called America, and ancestors who were from the African continent. So that would make me a calico variety victim AND perpetrator just by my heritage, before you even look at my behavior. That’s just nonsensical.

Get real about “you”. That’s the one good decision “you” can make. Get to know who you are. The more people who do that instead of finding groups to demonize and put down, the better your/our world will become. Given enough time, you can contribute to world change without increasing the conflict.

It is not beneficial to assign emotion-prodding labels to people simply because they were born a particular color or in a specific locale. Even if the influences you speak of did and do affect them, they…just like you…are just people, born wherever they were born and growing up into traditions that are never non-conflicted. It’s time to set aside traditions and be real and authentic… for your own well-being and self love… which can then be shared with all.

So are we supposed to ignore centuries of oppression and the lingering effects that reverberate down to the present day, just because it makes you uncomfortable?

This article is talking about a mindset that many white people have about people of color, and how that mindset is based on false premises.

It doesn’t say “every single white person ever” but it does make salient points about white people as a group. The only way to break out of fallacious thinking and prejudice is to examine it, not sweep it under the rug.

Where exactly do you see “angry-sounding claims” and “demonization” in this piece? It sounds matter-of-fact and level-headed to me.

No. Ignoring one’s circumstances never works. On the other hand, although anger-based activism does accomplish significant things, it also brings long- lasting negative effects. The good effect perhaps outweighs the bad (not always)…but…

If we look at the tearful, often fatal journey of the American black-white racial civil rights movement, it doesn’t hurt to wonder if there might be a better way, even in the midst of a nasty white- dominant society that takes one slow, giant step forward accompanied by thousands upon thousands of steps backwards. Yes racial bigotry is alive and going strong, despite the improvements. Sad.

Just so you’ll know, there IS a small subculture that steadily and consistently moves society in a new direction. They attempt to cope with aspects within themselves and their organizations that look (and are at times) too white. There are people involved of all races, all religions, all orientations and all walks of life from world famous highly credentialed doctors to nearly illiterate folks, people of wealth and status and folks from the poorest lifestyles, folks “from” militant gangs (including shot-callers) and from genocide-torn countries. They work literally side-by-side and make little pockets of genuine goodness and cooperativeness throughout the world. They’re all over the USA and Canada, in South American countries, African countries (including those frowned on by the US government), Asian countries, European countries, Middle East countries, Island Continents and smaller island countries…out there helping the world to heal itself. Theor efforts work to help overcome ALL conflict situations. It takes easy-to-learn expertise funneled into cooperative training of others combined with bringing each participant’s love and caring personality aspects to the surface. So anyway… this is happening right now, today, and you can be a part of it… and improve it. The best example organization involved across the globe is “Alternatives to Violence Project” (AVP). Find out where they are located nearest to your own location and jump in. Perfect? No…but… You WILL be pleasantly surprised! That much I can promise.

No need to ignore the negative stuff. But it truly truly helps to understand what really works and doesn’t bring additional negativity with it. Anyone can do this. My wife and I started a group locally in 2005. Today we regularly provide workshops in 3 prisons (and assist in others), provide monthly community workshops, youth workshops and various mini-workshops. Strangely, we are very, very recognized by our (US) state’s department of corrections… because the inmate population becomes quieter and safer among themselves and also toward correctional staff. The ideal situation would be if we could also train their correctional staff (which has happened elsewhere). You’re invited. It’s for everyone, whether they seem violent or not.

Violence- styled interactions is something that impacts us all and exists in personal relationships within families and without, in religions, in government and laws…in basically every aspect of society. It’s for those deemed to be “bad & violent”…and equally for those deemed “good and peaceful” for it adds proactive element and combines it with widely tested expertise that works and works well right away. You can actually see it working and track measurable results. By the way…your response inquiry was a very valid question deserving a meaningful response. Thanks.

I assume you are responding to Herneith. Do you know what color-blind racism is?

It’s not uncommon for white people to have varying degrees of color-blind racism, especially because of the white default. Mostly this is unconscious and unexamined.

There is nothing wrong with admitting to racial blindspots and trying to understand and overcome them. You can either commit yourself to that task, or you can be defensive and protective of your inner self-image to the detriment of any growth.

Sorry, after the webpage refreshed, I saw you also had a comment in reply to mine.

Thank you for your response. However, I still don’t understand why you think Abagond is calling for or advocating violence in this article. Can you quote for me where he appears to you to do that?

I’m also somewhat troubled by your assumption that no one here is aware of, much less involved in, peaceful solutions for racism. Could you please help me to understand where you’re seeing anger-based activism, violence-styled interactions, and negativity?

My reference to violence is a rather broad one. Writing about poor behavior in racial color terms is violence. People may be “white” and exposed to that which brings about poor behavior. But the choice for participating in life with poor behavior is a personal one, and is not a “white” one.

The tone of commentary that uses blaming is anger-based. I realize some useful logic is presented also.

I do not advocate that the author should do anything different. However, it is within the opportunity and capability of anyone to rethink what they’re saying and doing. If perchance they do this and also participate in some things that are capable of shifting their attitude and perspective, then how they emote, write and behave will follow suit.

I have no doubt that people responding to this article are involved in “peaceful solutions for racism”. However, not all “peaceful solutions” are viable to remove all conflict (and thus violence). The organization I mentioned comes close to and perhaps is the best solution out there. That’s why I offered the opportunity for involvement. One does not need to be overtly violent to benefit. It is of benefit to anyone at all, including those already involved in “peaceful solutions”.

Racism is a problem to be sure; however, it is not the root problem. The root problem is much more deeply ingrained in the psyche and is supported and maintained by many things we believe to be helpful and beneficial and necessary to living a good life. Because that is so, people fail to grasp that the problems they experience (which includes racism but certainly is not limited to that) are the products of those things they participate in and believe to be good.

I do not plan to go deep into that subject here, as it is obviously controversial and lengthy. I will make a short statement about it though. Generally, people do behaviors they have learned are good, having learned from their parents, their teachers, their religious leaders, their laws, etc. So their motivation arises from these things…instead of where it absolutely NEEDS to arise from (an inner understanding of their own selves’ reality). Because they participate in life by rules and traditions instead, they are not adequately edified…and because of that, their participation generates exacerbated conflict.

Bottom line? Most all of what societies do is based in memorized patterns (graven imagery). By their very nature, these patterns belong to yesterday and are not part of the now moment. Another way to say it is that people too often live according to yesterday for tomorrow…and that is foundational to all conflict.

It is both interesting and unfortunate that in general, the things Abagond says are true (regardless of “white” reference rather than people who choose). It is even more interesting and also critical to understand that drumming that drum cannot heal the world. Instead, it increases the rift of separation in mind. Yes, the history of the people who came to this continent (America) is “dirty, ugly history”. But it isn’t “dirty, ugly history” because they are white, but because they have believed in impossibly wretched things. Then when we look around us today, we find the exact same things they believed in being believed in by masses of people who believe themselves to be in the right, and some as victims of those earlier people. It’s not that they weren’t victimized, but it IS that they are setting the stage for more of the same. The same ideology (ideologies) practiced then are being practiced now, and it seems clear that not nearly enough people recognize that these ideologies are part of the root of their problems…and always have been.

A friend of mine and I were joking around about some negative things in our lives. I laid out some reasons that at least made some of it understandable. He said, “That isn’t the reason (for my negative behavior and circumstances). You’re just plain stupid!!!” Well, he was joking, but he was absolutely right. And people don’t do negative nasties because they’re white. They do it because they’re participating in traditionalized stupidity. Labeling people by skin color and ramping up the volume on collective evidence to “prove” those colorized claims is racism itself. Enough said.

“Labeling people by skin color and ramping up the volume on collective evidence to “prove” those colorized claims is racism itself. ”
No… no it isn’t. That may be your understanding… that somehow being labelled as “White” instead of just being labelled as a person has infringed upon your sensibilities in some way. Violently it would seem. But, that’s actually just your White fragility talking and if you were at all serious, you’d have already learned to recognize that within yourself and temper your knee-jerk reactions.

“It is even more interesting and also critical to understand that drumming that drum cannot heal the world. Instead, it increases the rift of separation in mind. ”
I ask you, in a world with oppressors and oppressed, who has the power and responsibility to change the dynamic? Should bloggers stop writing about the historical impacts of Whiteness, which have a direct connection to society today, simply because some will refuse to accept the significance in their own lives?

“Enough said.”
On this, we agree. Your response was 585 words… more than the original post. I’ve read the original post 4 times now, searching for what could have possibly provoked you to such passionate resistance. What might have compelled you to offer your “helpful” tips about solving racism by avoiding the concept of race. All I came up with was that you perceive being lumped in with millions of other people based solely on your skin color as an offensive act of violence against you.

Altarlight’s comments are a study in White Supremacist “Broken Record” arguments. A list of those recurring arguments can be found under the “Broken Records” tab at the top of this page or at this link:

*”This process is behavior that INDIVIDUALS choose or do not choose. There are no “whites”…no “Americans”…just people. Those people choose to dish out such deleterious behavior…or become impoverished or oppressed by the decisions of other “individual” people. True, people band together and exercise poor behavior together for their vested interests… and people band together to fight against it. Both sides of that equation contribute to global disparity and unrest… and war […]

I was born in a land called America… but I’m not an American. I was born rather pink… often called white… but I’m not a “white”.*

Abagond wrote of those who make these arguments:

“These arguments seem to be driven by two things:

1 “Blacks are racist too.” [arguments]

2 They are uncomfortable with being called White because they have been taught not to be race conscious. […]

The most maddening part is that in America it is Whites who draw the line between themselves and everyone else. They are the ones who apply the colour line and all the injustice that goes with it. They are making themselves White – and yet they do not want to be seen as White!”

”Making angry-sounding claims about groups of people, even when evidence says those claims are mostly true, is contributing to the emotional drive engine that perpetuates the disparity by keeping people emotionally locked into their side of the conflict, often believing they are “right”. It emphasizes a victim/perpetrator syndrome-oriented ideology and internalized mentality.”

Abagond noted the flaw and the objective of this argument:

”The tone argument is where you object to someone else’s argument based on its tone: it is too angry, too hateful, not calm enough, not nice enough, etc. It is a logical fallacy because none of those things has anything to do with whether the truth was spoken. It is used to derail and silence.”

“Yes, the history of the people who came to this continent (America) is “dirty, ugly history”. But it isn’t “dirty, ugly history” because they are white, but because they have believed in impossibly wretched things. Then when we look around us today, we find the exact same things they believed in being believed in by masses of people who believe themselves to be in the right, and some as victims of those earlier people.”

Abagond gets to the heart of this argument by writing:

”…everyone knows whites are not the only people who have done evil in history. So to keep bringing it up comes off as either some kind of weak “Everyone does it” excuse that eight-year-olds use or as a way to draw attention away from the evils of white history.”

AL’s attempt to sound ‘reasonable” only emphasize the tone-deafness of his arguments. His commentary is classic White Liberal racism complete with:

➤ do-gooder bonafides e.g. the prison workshops that, “the inmate population becomes quieter and safer among themselves and also toward correctional staff.” With no examination of the extraordinary violence the entire prison-industrial system does to Black communities, from police and prosecutors to prison guards and extractive prison commissaries. No wonder the Dept. of Corrections praise and recognize his group.

➤ denouncing “identity” and “generalized group labels” because non-European people asserting a strong sense of self means they center themselves in their own narratives instead of on the periphery of White Liberals.

➤ criticizing the understandable fury of the oppressed because, “anger-based activism does accomplish significant things, it also brings long- lasting negative effects.” Negative effects for whom, exactly? “Anger-based activism” was key to the legal end of slavery, Jim Crow and will likely bring about the end of this New Jim Crow. Negative effects, indeed.

➤ The arrogance of taking Black people to task for normal human reactions to oppression with very little understanding of the lived reality of Black people in this society.

You must be white then because it is you I hear drawing that very line and putting down anything not agreeing with you. Your rhetoric is the epitome of overt racism. That’s not calling blacks racists. It’d valuing you a racist. Huge difference. But then, you’ve got a loyal following. Too bad, as you make some good points

Actually you don’t have a clue yourself other than to spout off hate. You have no clue about the org. Go to any of MANY prisons where AVP is offered and ask the black people who have actually taken the workshops and then facilitated them inside the prison. Many of them go on to continue facilitating once they’ve been released. Lifers band together and promote it because it makes their lives better. You say I don’t have a clue…but clearly…VERY CLEARLY…you don’t even look, nevertheless listen.

I have seen plenty of white supremacists… racists to the core. They can change as well. So can you, although you seem to have no plan to change your style. You get so much ego support by handing out this stuff. Much of it is true…but whether you like the argument or not and whether you see it as white blindness or not… it’s being true is not what’s important. We all know it’s true already. The real point is in setting the stage for a tomorrow that’s different than today.

Have you ever seen opposing gang members becoming friends and begin working together to change their lives and ostensibly the world?

In our local community (non-prison) workshop, one of the founders of a major, well-known gang recently attended. He attended because he already changed his life without AVP, and could clearly see that the org is doing and offering exactly what is needed. Why? Simply because it works. And no amount of put-downs or accusations of racism can alter that or ever be enough without those changes.

People already “get it” that black people are getting shafted by the system. Wouldn’t it be great if you advocated something capable of reversing that? With enough people doing this, even a-hole correctional officers can become willing to change their modus operandi. A few here and there already have. Take a workshop yourself and see. If you do and still think it’s crap, tell me and I’ll spring for your workshop fee.

An actual example…

A woman wanted to attend a workshop. A community workshop was not available, so she opted to take one inside the prison with the inmates. She asked a friend to go with her. Ended up the friend went instead. She abided by the confidentiality agreements of the workshop. Toward the end of the workshop, people were given a chance to share whatever they felt they’d gotten from the workshop. This woman decided to share that she was a narc on the streets. Dicey! Then she said she could never arrest someone with the same attitude she’d had about convicts and drug users. One single workshop had transformed her attitude. Like it or not…that’s major.

Hey…maybe underneath it all, you’re not really a racist like I said. Maybe you’re just a person like anyone else. I was sooo crappy to say that, whether it seemed true or not. I was contributing to the rift and conflict. Go figger! And I thought I was perfect. Shucks

I agree with everything Open Minded Observer and Afrofem wrote above, and have some additional points to add.

“My reference to violence is a rather broad one. Writing about poor behavior in racial color terms is violence.”

I suggest that your definition of violence is too broad. There is no physical violence happening here, nor is there a call to physical violence. And the behavior this article examined happened in terms of racial color. White Americans set themselves up as superior because of their race and used that claim of racial superiority to justify their theft of land and labor, their oppression of blacks and natives. And I mean they explicitly used race: the writings of that era are filled with arguments that blacks and natives are inferior, childish, primitive races whom God has placed under the subjection of the superior white race. This historical behavior cannot be understood without racial color terms.

“People may be “white” and exposed to that which brings about poor behavior. But the choice for participating in life with poor behavior is a personal one, and is not a “white” one.”

There is some truth in this, but the problem is that historically those individual choices have added up to a society in which racism is inherent, what is often referred to as systemic racism or institutionalized racism. It is not enough to focus on the individual. Jim Crow segregation was not ended by quiet personal choices but by nonviolent protest, court cases, legislative reform, and a societal shift in attitudes. The continuing racial discrimination in our current society will not go away without similar actions.

“The tone of commentary that uses blaming is anger-based.”

Again, I don’t see any anger. Perhaps you should do some self-examination and ask yourself if you are subconsciously imposing an “angry black militant” tone onto what you are reading.

“If perchance they do this and also participate in some things that are capable of shifting their attitude and perspective, then how they emote, write and behave will follow suit.”

You seem more concerned with how the author emotes than the injustices he’s writing about. Ask yourself why that is the case.

“I have no doubt that people responding to this article are involved in “peaceful solutions for racism”. However, not all “peaceful solutions” are viable to remove all conflict (and thus violence).”

Ending violence is a worthy cause, but ending violence will not necessarily end racism. Or if racism is a type of conflict according to your thinking, it cannot be ended by simply ignoring it.

“Racism is a problem to be sure; however, it is not the root problem.”

Easy to say when racism isn’t the main factor shaping your life.

“Because that is so, people fail to grasp that the problems they experience (which includes racism but certainly is not limited to that) are the products of those things they participate in and believe to be good.”

This comes dangerously close to blaming the victim. Are you saying that people of color experience racism because of the things they participate in and believe to be good?

Or perhaps you mean that racism persists because of the things white people participate in and believe to be good? If so, you’ve just defined white privilege. A major roadblock to ending racism is that most white people are reluctant to change a system that they participate in and believe to be good, one that they know benefits them. And often this choice is subconscious, unexamined, reliant on the types of forces of tradition and teaching that you’re talking about. An individual cannot make a conscious choice to turn away from white privilege without consciously examining their own learned racism, and that begins with a realistic look at the historical roots of racism.

“It is even more interesting and also critical to understand that drumming that drum cannot heal the world. Instead, it increases the rift of separation in mind.”

This is only true if you believe the goal is to make white people feel guilty or to punish white people instead of urging white people to give up their false sense of superiority and stand as one with the rest of humanity.

“It’s not that they weren’t victimized, but it IS that they are setting the stage for more of the same.”

I’m going to ask you to do some serious introspection and examine whether your objections come from a deep-seated fear that people of color will retaliate against white people, and that talking about racism will do nothing but ignite those flames that you feel threaten you and yours.

I appreciate your taking the time to shift through what I wrote. I’m on my phone at the moment. However, I will respond from my PC when I can. Tomorrow, I’m out of town all day on critical family health business. The following day, I head to my ophthalmologist for a shot. Although I’m clear that your observations mostly don’t apply to me (except those niggly blind spots that creep in), I think your comments about privilege, etc. make perfect sense and have been there case for a long continuous time. What I mostly want to focus on is what works without backlash.

@altarlight
“People already “get it” that black people are getting shafted by the system.”

I’m sorry. I’m sure you’re doing wonderful work in conflict resolution. It’s just difficult to take your perspective on race seriously when you make statements like that.

It is telling that you are so quick to dismiss Afrofem’s responses to you as simply “ready made answers for all disagreements”. She likely spent 30 minutes or more parsing your comments and drafting her replies. Within those replies, she cited Abagond’s “Broken Records” post. If you stop for a second and ponder how unoriginal your comments are, you might appreciate the sheer volume of like-minded commenters it took before the broken records post was created.

Herneith posted a link, in the open thread, to an article detailing how exhausting it is to constantly explain racism to people that don’t “get it” as well as you may think.

I would think, given your training, the least you could do would be to feign empathy and take the time to listen to the views being expressed by the original post along with the responses you’re receiving here and reflect on how the assertions being made relate to you. You may be surprised to find that your perspective is incomplete and therefore your conclusions about the best way forward are not exclusively correct.

I’ve met his type before; a tone death white ‘liberal’, a white supremacist with a white Saviour complex. He’s more verbose. Going into prisons to ‘help’ the prisoners? You’ve got a captive audience. These other posters have the patience of job responding at length to you. It’s like farting in a wind tunnel it seems. Suffice it to say, I got your number.

Not only was AL’s response telling, it was expected. He has probably spouted his liberal racist diatribes elsewhere without challenge. He is used to getting his way.

AL’s use of “Broken Record” arguments was only the tip of the iceberg. In some of his commentary, he actually had the nerve to lump the actions of the oppressed in with their oppressors, like these gems:

“… people choose to dish out such deleterious behavior…or become impoverished or oppressed by the decisions of other “individual” people.

…people band together and exercise poor behavior together for their vested interests… and people band together to fight against it. Both sides of that equation contribute to global disparity and unrest… and war.”

Really? People “choose” to be “improverishd or oppressed”? People reacting to aggression by others are, “exercise[ing] poor behavior”?

Tell that to Muslim families in India who have recently been declared stateless by the Modi government. They are being herded into camps and some have been murdered. Did they “choose” that turn of events? I think not.